Nanotechnology is at it again, this time with nanogenerators
Nanotechnology never ceases to amaze me. Considering how complex we humans like to make things, not to mention how big we like to make things (SUVs anyone?), going ultra-small holds so many advantages. We talk about range-extenders when we speak of electric cars all the time, but the idea of carrying around an internal combustion (IC) engine all the time for the few times we would actually need to use it seems to make little sense in the long run. The problem is that with current battery technology, an electric-only car just will not work for everybody. So, vehicles like the HySeries Ford Edge concept using hydrogen as a range extender and the Chevy Volt using a small IC engine that can be powered by biofuels as a range extender may be seen as just a stepping stone to bridge the battery gap. But, what if you could pack hundreds, or even thousands of tiny generators which could generate electricity to charge the batteries while you drive just from the vibration of the road? Sound intriguing? It certainly does to me, as these tiny generators could be integrated nearly anywhere on a modern vehicle, and would weigh next to nothing. Obviously, cost and the available power from the nanogenerators would need to be worked out as this technology is still in the infant stage. But, it does hold out a hope for the future, doesn't it?
[Sources: Physorg and Technology Review]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kardax 4:44PM (4/06/2007)
I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that capturing the minuscule amount of kinetic energy from vibration would be a drop in the bucket compared to the energy required to get moving in the first place...
-Kardax
Reply
Jeremy Korzeniewski 4:48PM (4/06/2007)
Kardax - I'm no physicist either, but you are almost certainly correct. But, isn't it cool to see what nanotech is bringing to the table? Also, consider that Tesla is using thousands of li-ion batteries. One would not provide nearly enough juice to get moving.
Reply
Howard Lee Harkness 5:43PM (4/06/2007)
"But, what if you could pack hundreds, or even thousands of tiny generators which could generate electricity to charge the batteries while you drive just from the vibration of the road?"
I would hope that most ABG readers can spot the above quotation as being a description of a perpetual motion machine. I find it staggeringly amazing that an ABG reporter would say something like this, although I guess after the 3rd or forth time, I should stop being so surprised.
The read-link article makes no such idiotic claim, but mentions that this technology might be useful for powering small electronic devices from the movement of the human body -- which *is* feasible.
Reply
Joseph 6:48PM (4/06/2007)
This person is not talking about perpetual motion at all. They specifically said range-extender.
I personally think that in the next 20 years or so we'll have solar cells that will be able to fit on top of a car and extend range by 10-15%.
Off Topic: There will never be a solar car that can actually seat two people, go fast enough, and be crashworthy. Even if a solar panel was 100% efficient, it would take so many square feet of space, it would never fit on a real car. Solar cars only work if they weigh essentially next to nothing.
Reply
Jeremy Korzeniewski 8:58PM (4/06/2007)
Howard, I never suggested that this could be perpetual motion. I have never suggested that perpetual motion is possible, in this post or in any other.
As a range extender, however, I think this idea is interesting.
Reply
Matt 9:28PM (4/06/2007)
Jeremy, I enjoy pretty much all the great information you guys post. I think it's safe to say most ABG readers can spot a pessimistic energy extremest when we see one(Like say, Mr. Howard up there). No worries mate.
Reply
David 9:32PM (4/06/2007)
I'll tell you what I spotted.
Howard puts a ridiculous straw man out there, is insulting about it ("idiotic"), and in the end offers no mea culpa.
Real class act you have going there Howard.
Reply
Fabio 4:25AM (4/07/2007)
It's basically another kind of "regenerative" system, akin to the regenerative braking system: some of the energy that would otherwise be wasted in form of vibrations gets transformed back into electricity, thus increasing the range of the vehicle AND increasing the life of the vehicle itself, for some of the mechanical stress it undergoes gets absorbed.
Reply
Steve F 11:30AM (4/07/2007)
I agree that this is another type of regenerative
system. An another idea it to mount a rack of
these chips on the IC Engine to get maximum amount
of energy from the engine. Engine has consistent
vibration, even more than from the road. Could be
used in todays Hybrids or in future type cars like
the Volt. Could help get most from each gallon of gasoline or E85.
Reply
John Rowell 1:00AM (4/08/2007)
Here's my own idea:
You've probably heard of or seen those flashlights that you shake to recharge? They are rather simple, consisting of a magnet that slides back and forth inside a coil of wire. What if we put a magnet inside a car's shock absorbers and wrapped a coil of wire around it. Every time the shock abosrbers dampen a bump in the road, we get a little jolt of electricity to help charge the batteries.
Reply
kballs 2:54PM (4/08/2007)
People seem confused about what "range extender" means... I think GM and Ford made a mistake in using this term. In the case of the Volt or Hyseries, they offer infinite range extending (by stopping and refueling at a fuel station). This vibration generation tech is more like regenerative brakes... while it may "extend" the range, it's not uncapped like being able to stop at a fuel station.
I think it's okay to call solar/brakes/vibration tech like this range extending, because that's all they do (extend the range a bit but not perpetually).
I think they should call the generator/fuel cell in Volt/Hyseries type vehicles something more along the lines of "on-board generation", "on-board recharging", or "untethered recharging".
Reply
Tim 8:17PM (4/08/2007)
Anything we can do within the cost/benefit confines to co-generate and therefore not waste ANY energy is a good thing. The problem arises when we make things so complex and expensive as to render them useless. We don't all need a personal space shuttle now, do we? This is worth exploring until we determine it's too expensive or too complex. I just hope we don't waste too much money in the investigation.
Reply