Can we store thunder energy?

[chatlack]

Can we store thunder energy? I think we can... To electrolise water may be the solution. Pls tell your thoughts.....

[atinymonkey]

Are you seriously asking if we can store electricity?

[mmalluck]

I don't really think you need to "store" the energy. It wouldn't be practical.

 

To store the energy you'd need a giant capacitor. This capacitor would have to surge rated for hundreds of thousdands of amps and be rated for millions of volts. You'd end up with a structor as large as a storm cloud, with the distance between the plates being the same as the distance between the base of the cloud and the ground.... Not practical at all. True, modern science can probably do a little better (put some dielectric between the plates better than air), but not much better. The structure will still be huge.

 

Instead of storing the energy maybe we should merely trigger a strike when we need the energy. There's all kinds of possible ways to trigger a strike (model rockets with a copper wire tether or big ionizing lasers). The question then becomes, what do you do with several million volts at several thousands of amps, that only last a fraction of a second?

[swansont]

Thunder is the sound, not the electricity.

 

I'm sure it's possible to use some of the energy, just not practical.

[Callipygous]

we can store pretty much any kind of energy, the sound from a clap of thunder may be a little tougher, but im sure we can find a way to turn that vibration into an electrical current. microphone anyone?

 

you might have an easier time with lightning.

[5614]

Yeah, except the lightning strike occurs for a few millionths of a second and we don't really know where exactly it is going to strike... so it'd be a tad hard! Hence Swansont's "just not practical".

[chatlack]

I said electrolysis...Should it work?? Its much better and practical than making a capacitor in theory...

[neo007]

well, surely if energy cannot be lost and only converted from one form to another and "potential" energy exists, isnt it feasible to convert thunder into a type of "potential" energy(a type of enery store) so that it can be used when needed?

 

Sorry, if the above makes no sense at all, but i wa just wonderin...

[5614]

You can't really convert electrical energy into potential energy.

 

How would electrolysis store the energy? It'd use not store it... also you wouldn't know where to place the elctrolyte (thing which is going to undergo electrolysis).

[chatlack]

You dont know about hydrogen?? It seems to be the fuel of tomarrow.

And with electrolysis we get hydrogen.

 

I wrote it in engineering part because there is no problem in first look. You must give the problems and all of us must solve...

[atinymonkey]

Are you seriously asking if we can store electricity, via lightning, in water?

[neo007]

You can't really convert electrical energy into potential energy.

 

 

Yeah, i know sounds ridiculous

 

IMO wind and solar energy is the way forward!

...wonder how long it would take for cold fusion to actually work.

[5614]

OK, fuel cells could be 'fuelled up' using the hydrogen and oxygen given off but you'd have to calculate where the lightning would exit the container holding the water so that you could correctly seperate hydrogen and oxygen.

 

Also pure H2O isn't a very good conductor, if you added NaCl then it'd increase conductivity but you'd get Cl produce, which is not what you want.

 

As lightning takes the path of least resistance a high resistance H2O might not be the lightning's first choice.

 

Also as I said, you won't know where to place the water.

[5614]

...wonder how long it would take for cold fusion to actually work.

Many say it is not possible at all.

[chatlack]

No. I say "point me the problems on water electrolysis with lightning".

 

Are there problems??

[chatlack]

You can do those...Now you say that we cannot even electrolise water with DC.

 

Also we may not need any conductor, as lightning have enough energy to get through it. (we can easily hide electrodes) (And we can put many electrodes in many places) And all of them go to one pool.

[5614]

Well lightning is a DC, so it's just the same as a battery but on a bigger scale.

 

As I said, pure H2O (pure water) isn't a very good conductor. By making it more conductive you will change the output (hydrogen/oxygen).

 

Remember lightning takes the path of least resistance.... high resistance water is not going to be the 1st path... and lightning only takes one path, miss it the 1st time and you lose!

[chatlack]

You can make it the best way for lightning, it is easy. Conductive towers all over the country take lightnings and every moment you get fuel...

 

Any problem??

[5614]

Yeah, you'd need a tower every few square meters.

 

Building costs would exceed profit.

 

Lightning isn't that common.

 

You wouldn't get enough hydrogen/oxygen per lightning bolt to make it worth while.

[chatlack]

Then make the calculations??? (there is lightning maps) (Towers are better than reactor)

[5614]

You can't predict where lightning will strike that well.

 

You wouldn't get enough hydrogen to make it a profitable business.... hydrogen is so common people won't pay much for it, taking into account building the tower costs, how little hydrogen is produced each strike, how few strikes will strike a fixed position (the tower) etc etc it's not worthwhile.

[Callipygous]

OK' date=' fuel cells could be 'fuelled up' using the hydrogen and oxygen given off but you'd have to calculate where the lightning would exit the container holding the water so that you could correctly seperate hydrogen and oxygen.

 

Also pure H2O isn't a very good conductor, if you added NaCl then it'd increase conductivity but you'd get Cl produce, which is not what you want.

 

As lightning takes the path of least resistance a high resistance H2O might not be the lightning's first choice.

 

Also as I said, you won't know where to place the water.[/quote']

 

you make a big tower in the middle of a field in montana...

 

have you seen the lightning storms in montana?

 

getting a tower hit by lightning isnt that hard, we could even use preexisting towers. doesnt the lightning rod at the top of the Empire State Building get hit hundreds of times a year?

 

put a lightning rod at the top of the highest skyscrapers, but instead of grounding it, wire it to a chamber full of water with one plate (or piece of carbon?) at one side, hooked up to the rod, and another one on the other side grounded. hydrogen forms over one, oxygen over the other.

 

 

id call this one feasible (sp?). the only cost involved is lightning rods and chambers, thats not much. most towers already have lightning rods too.

[Callipygous]

how little hydrogen is produced each strike

 

oh, so i guess you calculated it?

 

i can electrolyse water with a nine volt. that will barely arc across a person tongue. the thing were talking about here is packing a big enough punch to bridge the gap between clouds and earth. were talking huge current, huge voltage. the biggest problem i see is the fact that its instant. im guessing that the amount of energy in a lightning bolt will get you a LOT of hydrogen, so what do you do when all that water gets a whole lot less dense pretty much instantly? im guessing you either need some way to spread it out over a longer time or you need a HUGE chamber so it doesnt explode from the sudden generation of a whole lot more volume.

[chatlack]

Answer is easy : Many electrodes....

[5614]

oh, so i guess you calculated it?

I guess you calculated it to prove me wrong?

 

There will be a huge current, but it is over a few micro seconds and I said "enough" so you might get "a lot of" hydrogen relative to your 9V battery example, but on an industrial scale you will not get enough hydrogen to make it a sustainable and profitable business.