h a l f b a k e r yExperiencing technical difficulties since 1999
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
NOTE! Following MaxBuchanan's calculations, this idea is proven non practicle - for lack of energy that can be received from tree roots.
-----------------------------------
Original idea:
Tree roots can pick up tons of earth and move large construction, so there probably could be a way
of harnessing this energy.
[link]
|
| |
You probaly could have a bun, but perhaps not [-]. |
|
| |
I wonder why you exclude bush roots and crop roots, which proportionately move comparable amounts of earth and small constructions. Everyone expects trees to work hard but weeds and grass get free rides! There should be an all-encompassing and catholic approach to root energy harnessing. |
|
| |
I'm guessing that a sizeable tree root can move a ton an inch
(3cm) in a year. Say ten such roots per tree. Total energy
yield for the year = mass x height x g = 10,000 x 0.03 x 10 =
3,000J, or a mean power output of about 0.1 milliwatts. |
|
| |
Incidentally, this amount of energy can be released by
burning about one gram of wood. |
|
| |
The threat of burning can be used to induce maximal energy from the roots. |
|
| |
It might be easier to fit a harness to an ent, since if I recall they are less branchy than regular trees. |
|
| |
//there probably could be a way of harnessing this energy// |
|
| |
This is not an idea. An idea would be 'here is a way of harnessing this energy'. |
|
| |
With capillary action and a bit of solar photosynthetic cellulose conversion this concept may bear fruit. |
|
| |
Just plant them upside down? |
|
| |
I think roots pick up water but what do I know! |
|
| |
earthworms are probably the way to go... +1 |
|
| |
I was secretly hoping for an aphrodisiac |
|
| |
//I was secretly hoping for an aphrodisiac//
[marked-for-tagline] |
|
| |
hope I get a mention! that would be a 1st "po was hoping..." |
|
| |
I doubt this would work, but i want to make a suggestion. Grow the trees hydroponically with the roots in a rigid container with a small piezoelectric plate somewhere. As the roots grow, the only place that can give is that plate, which generates electricity. I don't know how to avoid the same energy being used up returning that plate to its original position. I also think the water being pulled up through the roots might make a difference. I don't know how to ensure that the volume of water would otherwise remain the same. Maybe there should be a pipe into the container with a waterwheel. |
|
| |
Half defence:
a. [Bad], If what you wrote in the anno is not an idea, why are you writing it?
b. [uchanan], Why only one ton, say 30 tons (I've seen giant ancient walls displaced by tree roots), why per year? Probably the displacement occurs in a short period of growth, possibly days! That process may be controlled, to be repeated. And perhaps localized to small areas, so that in a small area several megawatt/hr of power could be produced. And then again, you may be right, and this cannot be done.
Back to [Bad] and to point <<a>>:
Seriously: I wrote it, like many other "ideas" in halfbakery, as a thought provoker, and like ALL halfideas here, this halfdea looks at an unexploited phenomenon, with some missing details. In this case, the "way of harnessing this energy" should be quite clear to anybody reading it: Using tanks of water which are raised, and then power a hydroelectric power station. We are only left with the details to be discussed, of how to repeat the process in the same location. And it turns out that this too was solved by [bun]gston. |
|
| |
//say 30 tons (I've seen giant ancient walls displaced by tree
roots)// By all means say 30 tons, though I suspect this
involved the concerted action of many roots. The point is
that the total energy available from any one tree in this way
is going to far less than that available from burning, say, a
very very small branch. |
|
| |
If you really want to extract energy from very small-distance,
high-force movements, use tectonic plate movement -
similar velocities, gillions of times more available force. |
|
| |
//The threat of burning can be used to induce maximal energy from the roots.//
Thus began the first of many Arboreal Religions. |
|
| |
[MaxB] thanks for the figures. I agree.
So what's best? Delete the whole thing, or leave it for reference in the future?
PS. Has anyone written of tectonic energy extraction? At the Jordan valley - as well as the whole Syria-African Break - there is a tectonic movement of several mm a year, along 900 km(!) and about 2000 km total length throughout the whole Middle East and deep into Africa. |
|
| |
No no - leave it here! If we went around deleting ideas on
the grounds of impractiability or lack of non-inutility, we'd all
be staring at a blank page.... |
|
| |
Re tectonic energy, I think it's been posted here. I have
no idea how much force is behind tectonic movements,
but it must be huge. Given that tectonic movements
seem to be able to rumple entire layers of rock quite
easily, I'm assuming a pressure of something on the order
of 1000kgf/cm^2. So, if you have a 10-kilometre-length of
fault, and if we assume (for no good reason I can think of)
the movement extends for 10km vertically, that's a total
force of 10^15kgf, or 10^16N. If the movement is 1cm per
year, that's 10^14 Joules of available energy per year, or
about 3MW of power. |
|
| |
Actually, on that basis, tectonic energy doesn't really
seem all that attractive; even if my estimates are out by a
factor of 1000 (giving 3GW of power), that's not much. |
|
| |