I suppose the downside would be that it wouldn't work..

The forces of the rotation of the Earth are pretty much negligible unless your gyroscope was huge and even if you had that then it would have to be pretty precise and have 0 resistance when rotating.....

Assuming you accomplish al of this and reach the stage of generating electricity you realise that the resistive force of generating the electricity is high enough to stop the rotation of the gyroscope so you make the generator extremely high torque. By the time you finish the project you realise that the amount of electricity being generated for the effort of what ou just build is pretty measly, but its still free nevertheless..

 

I've often imagined a small device that harvests energy from surrounding sources, such as light energy, viabration energy, RF energy, and thermal energy. I know that the military have a small module that will collect the energy from viabrations when soldiers walk. Pretty neat.

 

Or maybe not, but I'm trying to figure out what the catch is.

You have a large precision gyroscope. Rig it up on a gimble where as it rotates from the earths rotation (it stands still, the earth spins) you gear it up to a generator. The energy is from the earth's rotation, you could even use it to keep the gyroscope spinning (inject energy).

What is the down side?

I wonder how many chicken little's will worry about slowing down the earth.

Energy must be injected to start the gyroscope. The Gyroscope must either have large rotation momentum from either extreme RPM or from large size. Frictional loses of just keeping the gyro scope rotating will exceed any the energy extracted. Since earths rotation would be 1 RPD (that would be 0.0006944 RPM from the output of the gyroscope gimble however the gyroscope would need to be at significant RPM that is not useable) geared to up to create significant rotation on a generator the gearing would be large which would also loose significant energy.

Not trying to be a bad critic to your idea, just can't see this working at all.

Feel free to prove me wrong but just my thoughts.

 

I have no problem with that. I think it might work, but you bring up valid points. This is not a perpetual motion machine, it is tapping into an existing energy source.

A gyro is also a flywheel. There will be losses for spinning disk, but they can be made quite low. Once you've input the initital spin (which will require some juice) a small maintainance level of energy input would all that is require.

BTW, this is a popular science fair exhibit, the fly wheel turning in its mount.

 

I have no problem with that. I think it might work, but you bring up valid points. This is not a perpetual motion machine, it is tapping into an existing energy source.

A gyro is also a flywheel. There will be losses for spinning disk, but they can be made quite low. Once you've input the initital spin (which will require some juice) a small maintainance level of energy input would all that is require.

BTW, this is a popular science fair exhibit, the fly wheel turning in its mount.

There is no reason why this wouldn't work but as soon as you start trying to generate electricity it would stop spinning.

 

There is no reason why this wouldn't work but as soon as you start trying to generate electricity it would stop spinning.

Why is that? We're not tapping into that spin energy. The friction of the bearings is the issue here.

 

I played with this idea about 10 or 12 years back. It's great in theory but you can never get over the losses. To extract power from a 1 rev/day movement means step-up gearing which is very inefficient. By the time you get electrical energy out (after generator losses) you might be 20% efficiency or worse simple extracting energy from it.

You also need a big (that means heavy) flywheel, bearing losses for any bearings that can carry a big flywheel are killer, not to mention windage losses (air drag) as a flywheel is all circumference where the windage losses are highest.

Check out the new small boat stabilisation systems that use a flywheel of a couple hundred pounds, about the size of a washing machine. They consume hundreds of watts just to keep the flywheel spinning.

I love the idea of directly extracting the energy of the spinning planet but there is (at present) no practical way.

 

Just because it moves slowly does not mean you can’t get useful power from it. EG: It could slowly hoist a weight several meters into the air which gets released periodically converting its potential energy into generated electricity which can be stored. If you use many gyro+weight+generator machines, you could get useful constant power. Perhaps the gyro itself could be the weight.

I think it’s a great idea, but as has been pointed out, the losses increase as you try to draw more energy from it. Not just frictional losses, but the disk itself will slow when you draw energy. That’s where the energy is coming from.

I think you’ll find that even with a magnetically suspended gyro in a vacuum, you will need to put (at least) as much energy back into spinning the disk as you will get out.

I’d love to be proved wrong.

 

> I love the idea of directly extracting the energy of the spinning planet
> but there is (at present) no practical way.

Not exactly the sort of thing you are considering here, but there are tidemills.
Since the tides are due to the rotation of the Earth, a tidemill is a practical
way of extracting rotational energy which has already been in use for
several centuries. For a recent example, here is an interview about a
megawatt tidal generator in New York:

http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/76686

 

I think it’s a great idea, but as has been pointed out, the losses increase as you try to draw more energy from it. Not just frictional losses, but the disk itself will slow when you draw energy. That’s where the energy is coming from.

That is a invalid assertion, which can be proved by a simple childs gyroscope. Forcing one to precess does not slow it's disk down, it just resists change in angles. The energy you are tapping into is the earths rotation, not the spinning of the disk. Otherwise it would just be a flywheel.

 

The energy differential between the earth mass and it's immediate gaseous layer can be sensed in as wind,tides, fluxes, etc.

I would question this; what energy differential exsists between the earth mass (attached gyro axis) and a rotating mass ( in relatively immediate proximity to the earth mass)? I could see this affording energy extraction in increasing distance between rotating mass and earth mass. But two things would happen, financial and mechanical collapse.

Free energy surrounds us, in the form of wastage that rides upon our tradional generation.

Another form of energy, or more precisely the wastage of energy, is in the form of human energy. The energy that is required to bring our foodstuffs to the table and subsequently develops obesity is mindboggling.

 

I don't argue that. My needs are simple, a TV, air conditioning, and the internet. That and the ability to get to work and occasionally to the store.

My main excuse for the car is it's cargo capacity (groceries).

 

The energy that is required to bring our foodstuffs to the table and subsequently develops obesity is mindboggling.

Do you have calculations or data to support this? I'm curious because I never thought about this aspect of energy consumption. I have a good feel for the energy I use to drive a car, and to heat my house, and use appliances, but I never thought about the energy cost associated with eating. I'm not obese and eat very modestly for a 180 lb person, but even if I double my food intake, I would not have thought that the energy cost to transport my food "from farm to mouth" would be the major contribution to my energy usage.

 

Newsweek had an interesting article about obesity hatred. The tendency for people to blame others for problems is always with us, the Nazi party was nothing new in this regard. Interesting thing about blaming people who are obese is it is based on a lot of myth, bias, and prejudice. People don't change, just the targets do. Yes, I am obese, don't like it but it isn't going to change. I don't hide behind anonymity.

People need to eat. This isn't going to change either. There is a lot of energy spent transporting food over the globe. As long as it is the cheaper alternative, this isn't going to change.

I support a lot of the Green ideals, but not to the point of supporting a totalitarian regime. A lot of the more fanatic suffer from the urge to do good with other peoples money and freedoms, which is something most people don't and won't support, especially in the United States.

I would question this; what energy differential exsists between the earth mass (attached gyro axis) and a rotating mass ( in relatively immediate proximity to the earth mass)? I could see this affording energy extraction in increasing distance between rotating mass and earth mass. But two things would happen, financial and mechanical collapse.

An opinion not based on technical facts isn't worth much. I wasn't seriously proposing this would replace the worlds energy needs, but I don't see it bankrupting anyone either. Do you have anything concrete to offer?

The world is awash in energy, and we'll need more in the future. We'd better develop what we can. As technology develops the savings will be developed along side.

 

Newsweek had an interesting article about obesity hatred. The tendency for people to blame others for problems is always with us, the Nazi party was nothing new in this regard. Interesting thing about blaming people who are obese is it is based on a lot of myth, bias, and prejudice. People don't change, just the targets do. Yes, I am obese, don't like it but it isn't going to change. I don't hide behind anonymity.

Such an absurd comment hardly elicits a response.

 

Ok, I changed my mind. In an effort to stimulate thought, it looks like I've trampled over the life of a senior board member, to which I apologize. Bowng my head, I'll take leave.

 

Perhaps I overreacted, I am no fan of political correctness. I don't hide behind web anonymity, who I am and what I am is open for all.

This is meant to be a discussion of what is possible, not who is responsible.

I might be wrong, but I think the basic concept of energy extraction is possible. I don't think it will be that expensive to find out.

 

I use anomynity on the web for reasons of privacy, and I respect those that engage in that same basic right. I've never met you, nor am I interested in your physical disposition. You obviously have issues that prevent an open and intelligent discussion on some topics, so be it.

In regards to the alignment with Nazism, I strongly disagree.

From Moderator: This seems to be a loaded issue. We strongly discourage flaming and personal attacks. Please be careful about further posts in this vein.