Lightning-The New Source of Electricity? [Resolved: No!]

[Nicholas Kang]

Lightnings flash everyday. Can lightning be a source of electricity?

[Sensei]

Lightnings flash everyday.

But every time, in different place..

 

Can lightning be a source of electricity?

To some very small level, yes.

But quite unpredictable source of energy.

 

You would need to connect the all lightning conductors on area f.e. few km square together and then downgrade voltage from a few hundred or millions Volts with small charge, to lower voltage but higher charge.

 

We have here in neighborhood metal cross (15m+) on the top of mountain (nearly 2 km high).

I read somewhere it's hit by lightning once per day average.

If it has average Q=15 C and E=15 MJ (wikipedia has such average)

it's 5.5 GJ energy per year = 1521 kWh.

If we would have no loses in transformation (unrealistic) that's less than I am alone using in 5 months (330 kWh/m * 5m = 1650 kWh).

I would need 3 lightnings per day without loses just to cover mine own needs.

 

Edited June 25, 2014 by Sensei

[Nicholas Kang]

Do you think it is economical?

[swansont]

The ~1520 kWh Sensei calculated would net around US $175. Per year. That doesn't sound promising as compared to the infrastructure that would have to be installed to harvest it.

[Nicholas Kang]

That picture is authentic, Sensei.

[Ten oz]

Producing electricity isn't really a challange. Producing the ever growing amounts of on demand energy at the cheapest possible cost is the challange. I don't see how we could cheaply use lightning as a power source. Perhaps it we found a way of getting to it before the lightning bolts. If we tapped the difference of potential between clouds and the surround atmosphere? Even then it would be tough to beat simply putting a gallon of gas into a generator in terms of cost on convinience.

[Nicholas Kang]

And you must take the sustainability factor into account too. Petroleum and natural gas are cheap but they pollute the environment and don`t last long.

[Ten oz]

And you must take the sustainability factor into account too. Petroleum and natural gas are cheap but they pollute the environment and don`t last long.

absolutely !!! my point is that we already know how to create electricity with those things but choose not to because of cost.

[Nicholas Kang]

Can we alter the materials needed to lower the cost. I mean instead of chosing expensive materials, can I choose cheaper materials to build the Lightning Power Station?

[Sensei]

Forget it.

Solar panels are much more reliable and cheaper.

 

Once I calculated that I would need 18 m^2 of solar panels with 15% efficiency to cover all mine needs whole year.

Solar panel 1.28 m^2 (1600x800mm) costs here $315. So total investment in 14 panels would be $4410. Inverter I could make by myself.

That's price of electricity from power station for 67 months ($66 per month).

After 5 years and 7 months, I could have pure free electricity forever.

 

[Nicholas Kang]

In conclusion, we can use lightning to generate electricity but this is hardly possible due to the fact that it is not economical because the price of materials needed to build the lightning conductor generator is expensive. May I know which material of the hypothetical generator is expensive? Is it the receiver, the transmission process? Or other technical problems?

[Ten oz]

@ Nicholas Kang, it isn't simple as you are summarizing. For starters we don't currently have any large scale energy storage systems that can service industrial level needs. The enegery we produce with fossil fuels is on demand for the most part. To collect lightning we would need storage facilities that don't exist. Also, with fossil fuels we produce the power we need in the form we need it. The numbers of poles in a generate and the speed they turn produces the various voltages we use like 120vac, 240vac, and 450vac. So we would need to invert from DC to AC and then step it down with transformers. At each stage power would be lost.

Edited June 27, 2014 by Ten oz

[Nicholas Kang]

Storing facilities that don`t exist? What facilities?

[EdEarl]

BTW, lightening is evidence of charge between two points (e.g., earth to cloud) discharging, which means lightening has already converted electrical potential into heat and light, and there is little or no energy remaining. To effectively use that energy, you would have to prevent lightning by capturing the charges before lightning occurs.

[Ten oz]

Electricity is used a greater or lesser amounts throughout the day. If electricity is being gathered from an inconsistent source it would need to be stored up until it could be delivered at a steady output capable of meeting demand. The way we store electricity is batteries. Nature stores it in oil, coal, etc. For us, with current technology, it would be batteries. We don't have storage facilities (battery banks) large enough to service modern cities.

Turbines whether windmill, hydro, or steam all convert motion into rotation within generators. Electricity is created in the form we use it and sent out to the grid for consumption. They supplements fossil fuels. Static electricity would need to be collected then inverted before it could be used.

BTW, lightening is evidence of charge between two points (e.g., earth to cloud) discharging, which means lightening has already converted electrical potential into heat and light, and there is little or no energy remaining. To effectively use that energy, you would have to prevent lightning by capturing the charges before lightning occurs.

I alluded to this in an earlier response. We would have to find a means of exploiting the difference in potential between earth (ground) and clouds. Collecting lightning itself can not be done efficiently.

[Nicholas Kang]

OK. So, there is no need of using lightning as a mean of electricity source. Am I right? Just develop green energy industry would be better than developing ways to generate electricity through lightning.

[Ten oz]

^^^ In my opinion, with current technology, yes. Tidal, wind, and solar are better opinions. If someone could work out an efficient way to do it my mind could be changed.

More pressing than that is conservation. We (humans) waste incredible amounts of energy. We could probably cut usage by half implementing some smarter building codes and policies for both commercial and industrial industries to follow. Problem is that there is no money to be made in producing less and selling less energy. The money is in producing more and selling more energy.

[Nicholas Kang]

Good point.

[EdEarl]

"A penny saved is a penny earned."

 

Businesses that buy energy have an incentive to save energy and, thus, money. Businesses that sell energy want everyone to use more.

 

If everyone lived in an Earthship, or other off the grid home, we would use about 15% less energy in the US and many other countries.

[Nicholas Kang]

Thanks for your comment. I learnt something new about Earthship today. Thanks, EdEarl.

 

One question: Can energy be used for free instead of a tool to earn money? Then everyone would be happy.

[Sensei]

One question: Can energy be used for free instead of a tool to earn money?

 

IMHO, sure.

But that would require redesigning of our current consumptional & money based world.

Instead of selling everything for money, we should give everything what we do for free.

And everybody else can give us what we need also for free.

 

Such approach is not a problem in small societies, where everybody know everybody in f.e. small village. These people simply trust each other.

In older times before creation of food mass production and refrigerators, that was the only way to handle pig-slaughtering in villages: one family at a time was killing animal, and sharing parts of it to all neighborhoods (otherwise they would simply waste), knowing that they will return them when they will be pig-slaughtering their animal..

In tv documents about Amish they're often building house with neighborhoods. For free. The only cost is price of wood and nails (that would ruin building business & bank mortgage loans, if everyone would build their own house)

 

But current societies are made of people that barely know each other. Somebody giving something for free is treated as foul and abused. *)

 

That would require completely new approach to society.

 

*) that reminds me one local baker that was famous in tv & newspaper giving breads for free for people..

He was prosecuted by government because of not paying taxes from freely given bread..

According to (these complete idiots) government he should utilize (burn) bread that was not sold, not give it away to homeless.

 

Then everyone would be happy.

Except people that are making money on this business..

Taxes from electricity bills, and power stations dividends, are also significant amount to governments.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Sensei

[Phi for All]

If everyone lived in an Earthship, or other off the grid home, we would use about 15% less energy in the US and many other countries.

 

15% seems low, EdEarl. I'm replacing fluorescent lighting with solid state lights that save half the wattage, which works out to about a 20% overall savings on electricity, and that's just for lights.

[Nicholas Kang]

Then, topic ended.

 

Conclusion:

 

1. Not need to worry about energy crisis now.

2. It is not economical to develop lightning as a source of energy.

 

Thanks. Speculation is never a waste. It teaches you new things and clears out the impossibilities.

 

Regards,

 

Nicholas Kang

[Phi for All]

Then, topic ended.

 

Conclusion:

 

1. Not need to worry about energy crisis now.

 

Bad conclusion. Just because harvesting lightning isn't viable doesn't mean we don't need to worry about energy overall.

[Nicholas Kang]

then, correct my conclusion.

Do we have energy crisis now?