Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Check out these "Ocean Power Systems" by "BioPower" (Wow!)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 11:25 AM
Original message
Check out these "Ocean Power Systems" by "BioPower" (Wow!)
http://www.biopowersystems.com/


BioPower Systems is commercialising ocean power conversion technologies. Through application of biomimicry, we have adopted nature's mechanisms for survival and energy conversion in the marine environment and have applied these in the development of our proprietary wave and tidal power systems.

Our technologies inherit benefits developed during 3.8 Billion years of evolutionary optimization in nature’s ocean laboratory.The resulting systems move and sway in tune with the forces of the ocean, and naturally streamline when extreme conditions prevail. This leads to lightweight designs and associated low costs.

The inherently simple bioWAVE™ and bioSTREAM™ devices are designed to supply utility-scale grid-connected renewable energy using efficient modular systems. These systems will reside beneath the ocean surface, out of view, and in harmony with the living creatures that inspired their design.





The wave power system, bioWAVE™, is based on the swaying motion of sea plants in the presence of ocean waves.

The hydrodynamic interaction of the buoyant blades with the oscillating flow field is designed for maximum energy absorption. In extreme wave conditions the bioWAVE™ automatically ceases operating and assumes a safe position lying flat against the seabed. This eliminates exposure to extreme forces, allowing for lighter designs and substantial cost savings.

Systems are being developed for 250kW, 500kW, 1000kW capacities to match conditions in various locations.

http://www.biopowersystems.com/biowave-animation.php">View bioWAVE™ animation >





The tidal power conversion system, bioSTREAM™, is based on the highly efficient propulsion of Thunniform mode swimming species, such as shark, tuna, and mackerel.

The bioSTREAM™ mimics the shape and motion characteristics of these species but is a fixed device in a moving stream. In this configuration the propulsion mechanism is reversed and the energy in the passing flow is used to drive the device motion against the resisting torque of an electrical generator.

Due to the single point of rotation, this device can align with the flow in any direction, and can assume a streamlined configuration to avoid excess loading in extreme conditions. Systems are being developed for 250kW, 500kW, and 1000kW capacities to match conditions in various locations.

http://www.biopowersystems.com/biostream-animation.php">View bioSTREAM™ animation >
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. National Geographic News Story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Wow -- it seems so benign!
I hope the testing is promising and we can develop such a system.

Especially, with all the Arctic and Antarctic melting, aren't we going to have MUCH more ocean?

Fascinating -- thanks for posting these links!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
3. Do any of these devises work for the Great Lakes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Only if the Great Lakes have waves...
(That's a joke.)

I don't see why the BioWAVE™ system wouldn't work in the Great Lakes. However, I don't think there's enough of a flow for the BioSTREAM™. (Of course, I could be wrong.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyskye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. That's the ticket

Beautiful technology and implementation. Hope that their full scale testing goes well!

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
6. The ocean is my favortie source of perpetual motion....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. basis of tidal power
Edited on Wed May-21-08 12:57 PM by kristopher
I may be wrong about this but let me throw it into the mix. As you can see by the OP tidal forces include more than the rise and fall of oceans due to the pull of mostly the moon. This link is to a short description of tides. What is of note is towards the end, where it mentions 'sloshing'.

That sloshing is a very dependable 'wave' force that is often confused with the waves caused by wind.

Opps, forgot the link:
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/scenario/tides101.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. It seems to me that the bioSTREAM(TM) would be useful for more than tides
Edited on Wed May-21-08 01:29 PM by OKIsItJustMe


(Of course, I could be wrong.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You're referring to currents?
Edited on Wed May-21-08 10:35 PM by kristopher
They can be very valuable; I've pointed one out here several times. Between the lower E coast of Florida and bermuda the Gulf stream gains considerable velocity (remember the cube in the power formula) and is being eyed for I believe 2 projects right now using turbines designed on wind turbine technology with shorter rotors. This spot has large scale potential. I forget it exactly, but you can download a good study here: http://www.ocean.udel.edu/windpower/

Scroll down to Graduate Seminar on Offshore Wind Power and click the link for "Florida offshore winds and ocean currents".

The size of the resource is estimated there but it is nearly an 8mb file and I'm on dialup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #9
14. Yes, I was referring to currents
(Actually, the first graphic I'd considered was one of the "Gulf Stream.")
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-21-08 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
10. Those look promising compared to other designs I have seen
I think the idea of adapting the strategies of existing ocean life to survive extreme conditions is very much on the right track.

Having spent many years on the west coast, one thing I have always kept in mind when reading of "harnessing the power of the oceans" is that the ocean destroys everything. Seawalls, ship's hulls, jetties and docks, beaches and shorelines...nothing lasts. I have seen many designs that it would be hard to imagine lasting long enough to "break-even", but this seems promising.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 05:19 AM
Response to Original message
11. Off to the greatest page with you!
Sounds fascinating.

Wonder how the bioWave one copes with biological invasion (barnacles,
weeds, other colonising lifeforms)? (i.e., in the real world rather
than controlled test zones)

Thanks for posting! :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lazyriver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 05:26 AM
Response to Original message
12. Why aren't we working on such things? Oh, wait, that's right...
Cheney and his corporate oil masters run the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
30. We ARE working on such things.
There are many, many things in the pipeline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
13. "in harmony with the living creatures that inspired their design."
Hahahahaha. No, we're invading yet another habitat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Too late, we've already invaded that habitat.
Edited on Thu May-22-08 09:49 AM by OKIsItJustMe
However, consider this...

If the ocean floor in a region has power generating equipment on it, fishing fleets aren't likely to be dragging the bottom there. So, in the final analysis, the natural habitat may be better off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. We keep thinking that
Yet our impact just continues to increase. Our harnessing and extracting methods get better and more efficient, and so we just keep using more and more because it's now available to be used in the form that we need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. We use more coal and they start perishing anyway.
Coal and even dirty coal is getting more and more popular for energy generation. And the resulting pollution is doing massive harm to all ecosystems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Exactly
We either stop improving our ability to extract and harness energy, or we increase our ability to massively impact ecosystems.

Every species has its fair share of energy. That's why life is as diverse as it is. When a species uses more energy, that means there will be less for some other species, since there is no waste in nature. We no longer have any counter-balance in terms of the predator/prey relationship, other than diseases and viruses, and we attempt to eradicate those. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but that's what we do, and doing so allows us to use more energy, because more of us live, and live longer. More of us living, and living longer, must result in using more resources, since we still have to survive after we figure out how to live and live longer.

Again, short of actually reducing our energy usage, by making it more difficult to extract and harness energy from the environment, which is the exact opposite of why we advance technologically, we're going to do nothing but increase our impact. We don't get to escape. As long as we have to exist within whatever it is that nature is, we don't get to escape.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. No waste in nature?
Edited on Thu May-22-08 01:45 PM by OKIsItJustMe
The whole problem regarding "greenhouse gases" is that they inhibit the planet's tendency to dump heat into space. That natural heat loss, my friend, is waste on a global scale.



(If you will) the problem with "global warming" is that (with our assistance) the planet is becoming too efficient at retaining heat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Yeah, I guess you could call that waste
So if we continue to increase the efficiency of solar panels, what might we end up doing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. OK, I'll bite
My thought is that if we keep increasing the efficiency of our solar panels we might burn less fossil fuels, but I'm sure you have a very negative outcome in mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 04:46 AM
Response to Reply #29
42. "the planet is becoming too efficient at retaining heat"
And if we become more efficient at retaining heat, what are the possible effects of doing that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
17. Problem is when can these be made in bulk to actually have an effect?
Edited on Thu May-22-08 10:59 AM by Zachstar
I love the idea and they seem to be developing pretty fast but we need these to start going online in LARGE numbers in 2010 not 2015..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. I sympathize, but...
The key is to start.

Ideally, we would change our entire infrastructure by the end of 2008. Unfortunately, that's impossible.

So (for example) while we might love to have more efficient solar cells to put in place today, it's going to take a long time to get them in place in sufficient numbers anyway (even if we had sufficient production facilities, which we don't.) So let's start installing today's technology today, and continue installing better cells as they become available.

If these generators aren't ready for bulk installs today, let's do today what we can do today and ramp these us up as we are able.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. We were talking about this stuff in the 70s
I guess I am just starting to care less and less because it is only at the end is when people are starting to care. And I just don't see many solar, wind, and other facilities being built during a global depression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. When people perceive they have no choice it will happen
If nothing else, if we truly have a global depression, there may be less opposition to "public works" projects akin to the WPA and the CCC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. That depression was FAR different.
That depression was due to idiocy on the market NOT lack of raw supplies. I highly doubt we will be able to afford any of those programs when the Iraq war put the debt through the ceiling.

My ONLY hope (and it is a light one at best) Is that president Obama recognizes the value of the Navy's EMC2 project and turns it into a major project to put the scientists back to work.

We get enough of those online we can be out of the depression in 20 years. Maybe less if small communities work on renewable in the meantime. But doubtful.

Overall I expect about 50 years of ruin simply because Coal and Oil are NOT going to drop in price by a serious amount... We can PRAY for Oil to go back down to 100 but SERIOUSLY unlikely when countries start to lock down oil exports.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Will we be able to "afford" a new WPA and/or CCC?
We couldn't "afford" the originals. The government was broke then too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

On the other hand, Roosevelt also realized we couldn't afford not to have them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. I strongly disagree
The debt back then was NOTHING compared to now. And the debt was different. There was still LOTS of room for growth.

WW2 saved us from the depression because we could put all that RAW CHEAP oil, coal, metal, and other things to work. All the planes and cars and things left over from the war were put to good use. (B-17 and B-29 engines going on to start the major air travel industry)

Any attempt to try those today will be quickly defeated because of the history involved. Everyone knows those programs did not save us from the depression the best they did was lighten the load a bit and give us a little spirit.

What are we going to do? Build roads? Ok who is going to use them besides the rich? Gas is going to be over 5USD regardless..

Plant forests?

Build Nukes?

The only good I COULD see from some kind of massive work program is IF the Navy achieves a good fusion reactor design from their program. Many workers and researchers could be employed to build a network of reactor sites (No I am not talking about clanging together reactors I am talking about buildings to house the reactors) However that 100 percent depends on the success of the Navy Fusion Project which is not 100 percent and if they get another budget hit like Iraq caused it could vanish completely. And that is 10 years away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. I primarily had in mind building solar and wind farms
Edited on Thu May-22-08 02:37 PM by OKIsItJustMe
I suppose repairing our roads would be a nice bonus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. Then comes the arguement that the gov will favor some states with solar and wind farms and not other
There are some states that solar and wind simply will not work. So building them there will amount to nothing more than pork.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. And your point is...
Since the solution will be less than ideal, we should do nothing. (Is that it?)

Would they all be put in the wrong places? Most of them?

Would any of them be put in advantageous places?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. Bullshit.
Every state has renewable resources (example geothermal); some more than others. Add in grid transmission and upgrading to smart grid, along with rewiring the parking lots, homes, and electrical refueling 'spots' and you have plenty to get this nation moving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Yes lets just throw money EVERYWHERE WOOT!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. No, let's throw it where it might do some good
You're a fan of military spending. Certainly you won't argue that there is no waste in military spending.

Can you say "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-1_bomber#B-1B_program">B1-B?" How about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M247_Sergeant_York">Sergeant York? ...

(Need I go on?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. Your history sucks.
The rural electrification program and expansion of the road system have probably paid bigger dividends than any other government programs in history.

Likewise, a major government effort that relieves the economic lifeblood flowing out of this country for energy is going to have similar positive economic results. I can't imagine a more productive government activity.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. Military
See we have not been invaded in say? a bunch of decades?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. Military spending is not necessarily productive
http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html
...

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #24
32. Screw that!!!
The price of oil and coal are still lower than they need to be.

Building new infrastructure under financing by the government is the way things like this typically get done.
Your read of the circumstances is way off as evidence by thinking that lower energy prices are an asset in this restructuring.

Just get used to having a larger part of your personal wealth devoted to paying for the energy you use.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. Yes the people are not suffering enough!! MAKE THEM HIGHER!!!
And then we can throw money at the problem!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OKIsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-22-08 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. Actually, I've been saying for years...
"So long as SUV's are the most popular type of vehicle in America, gas is too cheap."

I was all for a gas tax in the 80's. Had we artificially increased the price at that time, we might have stimulated demand for more efficient cars, and we might not be in quite the pickle we are today.

Today's taxes are "lost in the noise."
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/04/gas-tax-holiday.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stuntcat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-23-08 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
43. oo I think it's beautiful!
(I'm pretty sure it's downhill from here and I've really lost faith in people but) no matter what happens we're gonna need more energy so this could be HUGE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC