Saturday, December 27, 2008

HARVEST the FUNDING!

Harvesting the Ocean: A New Approach to Wave Energy Conversion


%20harvester_470

By Tyler Seed

While much attention on renewables in recent years has focussed on solar and wind technologies, awareness has been growing around the enormous energy generating potential of the Earth's oceans. A 2005 report from the Electric Power Research Institute stated that wave power properly and effectively harnessed, would likely have minimal environmental impact, and be much less visible on the landscape, than competing technologies. At the same time, waves possess the advantage of being more predictable than either wind or solar, which in principle makes ocean power a more reliable source of energy.

The rapidly expanding field of wave power is rife with innovation and an extraordinarily diverse range of approaches. Several technologies have been, and are being, developed and tested in coastal regions around the world. So far however, technical challenges involved in engineering a sufficiently inexpensive, efficient and reliable method of extracting this energy have proven difficult enough that as yet there is no agreed upon 'best way' to do it.

Among the significant difficulties facing engineers of commercially viable wave power have been durability in storms, and low generating capacity factors resulting from the difficulties of extracting a steady load from constantly shifting wave motions. Irregular and alternating wave motions lead to large variations of the power produced, severely limiting the power output of many Wave Energy Converters (WEC).

Mikael Sidenmark, founder of Ocean Harvesting Technologies, and the inventor of the Ocean Harvester (pictured above), has developed a method of generating electricity from waves that offers compelling and cost-efficient solutions to these problems.

As Sidenmark explains:

A buoy follows the wave motions at the surface. When the wave rises, a drum inside the buoy is rotated by a mooring line wound around it, converting vertical motion into a rotation. This is a very efficient way of extracting energy from waves that is independent of the wave sizes and has been used in earlier technologies.
What is unique with the Ocean Harvester is the way a counterweight is used to achieve a leveled and controlled load on the generator. As a result, excess energy from larger waves can be accumulated and used to compensate for shortage from smaller waves. In combination with the flexible mooring, this also composes a simple and efficient storm protection system.
Together, these characteristics result in an exceptionally high capacity factor.

The system should produce a consistent level of power throughout the wave motion, over changing wave sizes, and even in storms. Besides generating efficiently and evenly, the simplicity of its design will allow the Ocean Harvester to be easily protected in rough conditions, and make its manufacture impressively cost-efficient.

Ocean Harvesting Technologies is currently planning a two-year scale model testing period, slated to begin in March 2009 in the coastal Blekinge region of Sweden, on the Baltic Sea. The company expects the Ocean Harvester to enter the commercial market in 2013.

The AquaBuOY
Image source: Finavera
AquaBuOY%202.0%20Deployedsm.jpg

Institutions across Sweden are researching further possibilities of wave energy. Among those with notable programs are Uppsala University, Blekinge Institute of Technology (BTH) (where wave power research initiated with the Ocean Harvester in February 2008), and at Chalmers University of Technology, where researchers were involved in pioneering the AquaBuoy, a concept now being tested on a commercial scale.

Read more about innovations in wave energy in the Worldchanging archives:

Wave Energy (2005)

The Wave Hub (2006)

Biomimetic Ocean Power (2006)

Graphic Series: Earthly Ideas, Week 10: Ocean Power (2008)

Tyler Seed is completing a Masters' degree in Sustainability at Blekinge Institute of Technology in Karlskrona, Sweden.

Top image source: Ocean Harvesting Technologies

Nor Proof that it Wasn't?

State: No proof ship was found

BY ED WHITE • ASSOCIATED PRESS • December 27, 2008

The State of Michigan says it has seen no additional evidence to support a claim that a famous 17th-Century ship is buried in northern Lake Michigan.

Divers at the site in October found nothing besides a timber protruding from the lake bottom, a piece of wood that was photographed in 2003 or 2004, Assistant Attorney General Louis Reinwasser said.

The disclosure was made in documents filed this week in federal court in Grand Rapids.

A group called Great Lakes Exploration discovered the timber in 2001 and says it believes it may be the wreck of the Griffon, a vessel built by French explorer René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle. It sank in 1679.

La Salle's other ship, La Belle, was discovered in the mid-1990s off the Texas coast. With approval from France, state archaeologists there recovered nearly 1 million artifacts, from human bones to muskets, and publicly displayed many of them.

Great Lakes Exploration wants to be appointed custodian in the Michigan case. But the state is asking U.S. District Judge Robert Holmes Bell to dismiss the lawsuit, saying it controls any shipwreck that is embedded and abandoned.

The precise location has not been publicly disclosed, but it's believed to be between Escanaba and the St. Martin Islands, near Wisconsin.

Divers working on Oct. 21-22 "found nothing ... that could possibly be the remnants of a 17th-Century sailing vessel, with the exception of one wooden timber," Reinwasser said.

"There's not just a piece of wood there. The wreck was scattered over time," Rick Robol, an attorney for Great Lakes Exploration, said Friday. "Their arguments are not new."

GIVE STUDENTS ALTERNATIVE ENERGY EDGE by DESIGN!

photo

St. Clair County students work on a solar-hydrogen fuel cell car. From left: Jason Hoogerhyde, John Freeman, Cody Benedict and Evan Miller. Rather than learning TV repair, students are getting trained in alternative energy.



Schools to invest in alternative energy, give students edge


BY PEGGY WALSH-SARNECKI • FREE PRESS EDUCATION WRITER • December 27, 2008

St. Clair County RESA Career Technical Center students will be calculating actual energy outputs from school-owned windmills, solar panels and a hydroelectric plant.

In Warren Consolidated Schools, students will find lessons from a district-owned wind power station integrated into their classes.

Both programs are the result of a trend by a growing number of schools to meld alternative energy into their lesson plans.

"I think kids are interested in this type of thing. And a lot of us see it as the future, to lessen our reliance on nonrenewable sources. And there are going to be jobs there," said Dan DeGrow, superintendent of St. Clair County Regional Educational Service Agency.

St. Clair RESA plans to invest up to $450,000, depending on how much grant money it receives, in three wind turbines -- each about 100 feet tall -- solar panels next to the turbines and a mini-hydro plant. It will be working with local governments on getting site permits.

Gone are the days of students taking high school electronics to become TV repairpeople. The jobs are moving to other categories, such as alternative energy technicians.

"What we decided was we wanted a way to teach traditional electronics but within a more current context," said Pat Yanik, director of career and technical education for RESA.

Beginning next fall, students will monitor the electricity generated by their three alternative energy sources, learn how to convert the power to actual energy and make decisions on how to distribute their self-generated electricity to RESA facilities. The actual energy generated will be small, but the lessons will be huge.

"With the energy crisis and the government push for it at the federal level and the state level, alternative energy seemed to be a pretty going item that students and parents can understand," said electronics teacher Zack Diatchun.

The Warren Consolidated Schools Board of Education has approved up to $9,000 for a wind spire -- a smaller (30-foot high) version of the windmill-style turbine -- to establish a district-wide alternative energy institute, said Superintendent Robert Livernois. Like St. Clair RESA, Warren Consolidated also hopes much of the cost will be offset by grants.

"The sky's the limit for us. That's what's so exciting about it from a K-12 perspective, you can talk to a second-grader and a 12th-grader," Livernois said. "Our belief is you've got to start somewhere, so as we launch this institute, it's really designed to begin cultivating awareness."

Students at St. Clair RESA have been told their program will open in the fall.

"It doesn't seem like something that they put into a high school-type course, but it's a really good idea they're putting it in," said Cody Benedict, 17, a senior from Yale High School who will be going to school for another year and taking the energy program. "It's going to be a larger range of stuff to learn for jobs."

There's no timetable for the Warren Consolidated program yet, but Livernois expects there will be varying components of alternative energy that will be applicable to most grades.

"We're going to use it in a study of just how much energy you can produce in the community," said Mark Supal, a technology teacher at the Macomb Mathematics Science and Technology Center, where the wind spire will be located.

Even students who won't be around for the new programs recognize the possibilities.

"I got accepted to Michigan Tech ... and I'm probably going to take electrical engineering, but I'm probably going to branch into some kind of alternative energy," said Dalton Pelc, 17, a senior from Kimball Township attending Port Huron High School. "That's what we need, and that's because that's what the economy needs."

Contact PEGGY WALSH-SARNECKI at 586-826-7262 or mmwalsh@freepress.com.

Monday, December 22, 2008

Dan Keifer on Trout and the Clinton River Watershed

Maintaining trout focus of Clinton river project

Sunday, December 21, 2008 12:25 AM EST
By BOB GROSSSpecial to The Oakland Press

Steelhead season is still a couple of months away, but trout and the Clinton River are always on Dan Keifer’s mind.Keifer, 60, is community outreach coordinator for the Clinton River Watershed Council.

He’s also one of the driving forces behind the council’s coldwater conservation project, an effort to reinvigorate and maintain a year-round trout fishery in the Clinton and its tributaries, notably Paint Creek.The project enters its seventh year this spring, he said.

“Certainly, the visible physical success has been building fish habitat,” Keifer said. “We’ve done four years worth of building fish habitat structures in the Clinton River main stream as well as Paint Creek.“We have gained a greater appreciation of the fish habitat we have here.”

The project is focusing on Paint Creek and a stretch of river totaling about 20 miles from Interstate 75 in Auburn Hills east to Yates Dam on the border between Rochester Hills and Clinton Township.

“Paint Creek is OK,” he said. “We’ve focused more of our attention in the past couple years on taking care of Paint Creek.”

Keifer said the goal is to determine what the limiting factors are that keep the Clinton River from sustaining a larger trout population.Over the past six years, Keifer said, the project has determined that stream flows and resulting temperatures, particularly in the summer, comprise perhaps the greatest limiting factor in sustaining a year-round brown trout population in the main stream of the Clinton River.“(Trout) are very sensitive, especially in the summer months,” he said.

Not only does the stream temperature increase as the flows decrease, he said, but warm stormwater coming off parking lots, streets and rooftops can cause a sudden spike in temperature, stressing the fish.In a more rural area, he said, stormwater has a chance to soak into the ground, where it is cleaned and chilled before it returns to the stream.

“When you have a lot of rooftops, parking lots it happens all at once,” Keifer said. “Rivers are asked to handle more volume of water than Mother Nature ever intended.”

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources in 2003 resumed stocking brown trout in the Clinton River in Auburn Hills as part of the project.“They have fared fairly well,” Keifer said. “It is hardly a huge success. It has been successful in that we know from angler reports and our own findings there are holdovers. Fish planted as seven to eight inches are now 12 to 14 inches, indicating they are three to four years old.”

Shaun Keenan, water resources coordinator for Auburn Hills, said the city does receive reports from anglers catching fish in the Clinton.“Over the summer, there were a few anglers who I spoke with — when I go out to lunch or whatever I go out to the parks — and they mentioned they were catching some as well, of the browns and the rainbows,” he said.

The rainbow trout in the river are typically young steelhead — a rainbow trout that spends much of its adult years in the Great Lakes before returning to its natal river to spawn.Keenan called the project “a success because we are still doing it.”

“As far as Auburn Hills is concerned, we see it as a success because we have fish in the area, and we are seeing an increase in the number of people fishing in the parks,” he said.

Keifer, who this past fall received the National Distinguished Service Award from Trout Unlimited for his efforts on the coldwater conservation project, said the group intends to study stream flows in the main branch of the Clinton River this summer.

“It’ll look at all of the flow regimes, including how all the lake level control structures up through the upper part of the watershed affect flow regime and water temperatures,” he said.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

21st Century Digital Learning Environments (Pedagogy)

21st Century Pedagogy

Even if you have a 21st Century classroom (flexible and adaptable); even if you are a 21st century teacher ; (an adaptor, a communicator, a leader and a learner, a visionary and a model, a collaborator and risk taker) even if your curriculum reflects the new paradigm and you have the facilities and resources that could enable 21st century learning - you will only be a 21st century teacher if how you teach changes as well. Your pedagogy must also change.



So what is 21st Century pedagogy?

Definition:
pedagogy - noun the profession, science, or theory of teaching.
Source: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/pedagogy?view=uk

How we teach must reflect how our students learn. It must also reflect the world our students will move into. This is a world which is rapidly changing, connected, adapting and evolving. Our style and approach to teaching must emphasise the learning in the 21st century.

The key features of 21st Century Pedagogy are:
? building technological, information and media fluencies [Ian Jukes]
? Developing thinking skills
? making use of project based learning
? using problem solving as a teaching tool
? using 21st C assessments with timely, appropriate and detailed feedback and reflection
? It is collaborative in nature and uses enabling and empowering technologies
? It fosters Contextual learning bridging the disciplines and curriculum areas

Knowledge
Knowledge does not specifically appear in the above diagram. Does this mean that we do not teach content or knowledge? Of course not. While a goal we often hear is for our students to create knowledge, we must scaffold and support this constructivist process. The process was aptly describe in a recent presentation by Cisco on Education 3.0 [Michael Stevenson VP Global Education Cisco 2007]

We need to teach knowledge or content in context with the tasks and activities the students are undertaking. Our students respond well to real world problems. Our delivery of knowledge should scaffold the learning process and provide a foundation for activities. As we know from the learning pyramid content delivered without context or other activity has a low retention rate.

Image2



Image 3

Thinking skills
Thinking Skills are a key area. While much of the knowledge we teach may be obsolete within a few years, thinking skills acquired will remain with our students for their entire lives. Industrial age education has had a focus on Lower Order Thinking Skills. In Bloom's taxonomy the lower order thinking skills are the remembering and understanding aspects. 21st Century pedagogy focuses on the moving students from Lower Order Thinking Skills to Higher Order Thinking Skills.


Image 4

The 21st Century Teacher scaffolds the learning of students, building on a basis of knowledge recall and comprehension to use and apply skills; to analyse and evaluate process, outcomes and concequences, and to make, create and innovate. For each discipline in our secondary schools the process is subtly different.

Collaboration
The 21st century is an age of collaboration as well as the Information Age. 21st Century students, our digital natives, are collaborative. The growth of social networking tools, like bebo and myspace and the like, is fueled by Digital natives and Gen Y. The world, our students are graduating into is a collaborative one.

Collaborative projects such as Julie Lindsay's and Vicki Davis's Flatclassroom project and the Horizon Project, iearns and many others are brilliant examples of collaboration in the classrooms and beyond. These projects, based around tools like ning or wikis, provide students and staff a medium to build and share knowledge and develop understanding.

For example:

My own students are collaborating with students from three other schools, one in Brisbane, another in Qatar and a third in Vienna; on developing resources for a common assessment item. Collaboratively, they are constructing base knowledge on the technologies pertent to the topic. They are examining, evaluating and analysing the social and ethical impacts of the topic. But perhaps even more holistically they are being exposed to different interpretations, cultures and perspectives - Developing an international awareness which will be a key attribute in our global future.

URL: http://casestudy-itgs.wikispaces.com


Don Tapscott in Wikinomics, gives are many of examples of the business world adopting and succeeding by using global collaboration.

In a recent blog post from the Official google Blog, Google identified these as key traits or abilities in 1st Century Employees...

"... communication skills. Marshalling and understanding the available evidence isn't useful unless you can effectively communicate your conclusions."
"... team players. Virtually every project at Google is run by a small team. People need to work well together and perform up to the team's expectations. "

Source: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/our-googley-advice-to-students-major-in.html

So to prepare our students, our teaching should also model collaboration. A vast array of collaborative tools are available to - wikis, classroom blogs, collaborative document tools,social networks, learning management systems - Many are available at no cost. If you have not yet tried them, look at:
? wikis - wet paint and wiki spaces
? Classroom blogs - edublogs, classroomblogmeister
? Collaborative document tools - Google documents, zoho documents
? Social Networks - ning
? learning managements systems - Moodle etc
These tools are enablers of collaboration, and therefore enablers of 21st century teaching and learning.

Collaboration is not a 21st century skill it is a 21st century essential.

If we look at UNESCO's publication "The four pillars of Education, Learning: The Treasure within" Collaboration is a key element of each of the four pillars.

  • Learning to know
  • Learning to do
  • Learning to live together
  • Learning to be

(http://www.unesco.org/delors/fourpil.htm)

Collaboration is not limited to the confines of the classroom. Students and teachers collaborate across the planet, and beyond the time constraints of the teaching day. Students work with other students regionally, nationally and globally. Learners seek and work with experts as required. This is 21st Century Collaboration

Real World, Inter-disciplinary & project based learning
21st Century students do not want abstract examples rather they focus on real world problems. They want what they learn in one subject to be relevant and applicable in another curriculum area. As teachers we need to extend our areas of expertise, collaborate with our teaching peers in other subjects and the learning in one discipline to learning in another.
Projects should bring together and reinforce learning across disciplines. The sum of the students learning will be greater than the individual aspects taught in isolation. This is a holistic overview of the education process which builds on and values every aspect of the 21st Century students education.


Image 5

Assessment
Assessment is still a key part of 21st Century Pedagogy. This generation of students responds well to clear goals and objectives, assessed in a transparent manner.

Students should be involved in all aspects of the assessment process. Students who are involved in setting and developing assessment criteria, marking and moderation will have a clearer understanding of:
? what they are meant to do,
? how they are meant to do it,
? why it is significant
? why it is important.
Such students will undoubtedly do better and use the assessment process as a part of their learning.

Students are often painfully honest about their own performance and that of their peers. They will, in a collaborative project, fairly assess those who contribute and those who don't.

This is their education, their learning and their future - they must be involved in it.

Linked to assessment is the importance of timely, appropriate, detailed and specific feedback. Feedback as a learning tool, is second only to the teaching of thinking skills [Michael Pohl]. As 21st Century teachers, we must provide and facilitate safe and appropriate feedback, developing an environment where students can safely and supportively be provided with and provide feedback. Students are often full of insight and may have as valid a perspective as we teachers do.

Fluency
What is fluency and why is it better than Literacy? Ian Jukes introduced this concept at NECC. He asserts that students need to move beyond literacy to fluency. They need to be
fluent in:
? The use of technology = technological fluency,
? Collecting, processing, manipulating and validating information = information fluency,
? using, selecting, viewing and manipulating media = media fluency,

What is fluency compared to literacy? A person who is fluent in a language does not need to think about speech, or reading rather it is an unconscious process of understanding. A person who is literate in the language must translate the speech or text. This applies to our students and their use of 21st century media. We need them to be unconsciously competent in the use and manipulation of media, technology and information.

The conscious competence model illustrates the difference between Literacy and Fluency. The person or student who is literate is in the conscious competence category. The person or student who is fluent is in the unconscious competence category.

Image 6

As educators, we must identify, develop and reinforce these skill sets until students become literate and then fluent..

Conclusion and the path forward.

To teach using 21st Century pedagogy, educators must be student centric. Our curricula and assessments must inclusive, interdisciplinary and contextual; based on real world examples.

Students must be key participants in the assessment process, intimate in it from start to finish, from establishing purpose and criteria, to assessing and moderating.
Educators must establish a safe environment for students to collaborate in but also to discuss, reflect and provide and receive feedback in.

We should make use of collaborative and project based learning, using enabling tools and technologies to facilitate this.

We must develop, in students, key fluencies and make use of higher order thinking skills. Our tasks, curricula, assessments and learning activities must be designed to build on the Lower Order Thinking Skills and to develop Higher Order Thinking Skills.

Image 7

Acknowledgements:
For being a brilliant critical friend, thanks for the advise and especially for the grammar - Marg McLeod.

By Andrew Churches

Arne Duncan Secretary of Education









Reform Starts Now: Obama Picks Arne Duncan

His secretary of education selection shows education is a priority.

by Grace Rubenstein
December 16, 2008

President-elect Barack Obama talked reform while announcing Chicago schools chief Arne Duncan as the next U.S. secretary of education.

"For Arne, school reform isn't just a theory in a book, it's the cause of his life," Obama said at Tuesday's press conference. Obama specifically mentioned pay-for-performance teacher salaries and charter-schools development as strategies with strong potential.

"If charter schools work, let's try that," Obama said. "Let's not be clouded by ideology when it comes to figuring out what helps our kids."

Duncan described his clear-eyed view of education in a June 2007 interview [1] with Edutopia when he said, "Quality public education is the civil rights issue of our generation."

Duncan, known for transforming underperforming schools and experimenting with new models, has a record as a pragmatist with a taste for innovations. His version of reform, judging by his record, centers on boosting teacher quality and supporting students with added services such as after-school programs. In the Chicago Public Schools [2], where 85 percent of the 400,000-plus students live below the poverty line, test scores, attendance, and teacher retention all went up during Duncan's seven-year tenure, while the dropout rate declined.

The Buzz
For weeks, pundits, educators, and education bloggers have speculated on what Obama's pick would show about his true beliefs on education.

"Arne Duncan has a type of personality that Obama seems to prefer, which is a pragmatist who will bring about change, but he'll do it in a way that will minimize confrontation in conflict," says Jack Jennings, president of the nonpartisan Center on Education Policy [3]. "He's brought about change in Chicago, but it hasn't been a head-on clash with the teachers' union. He's done it in a way that they all walk away from the table congratulating each other."

Supporters say Duncan has the right constitution for the job. On both substance and style, he has won praise from divergent interest groups, including the American Federation of Teachers [4] and the New York City-based Democrats for Education Reform [5].

Duncan shut down Chicago schools that performed poorly and reopened them with entirely new staffs. He started coaching and mentoring programs for teachers. He also supported a boom in new charter schools with diverse models, from military academies to single-sex schools, and piloted a program to pay teachers bonuses for top performance -- two controversial innovations Obama supports.

An Uncertain Future

Of course, an education secretary can't exactly dictate reform from on high. But he can use the bully pulpit to put a spotlight on certain problems and solutions, says Jennings, and hand out grants to support new innovations. He can also provoke change through regulations -- most notably those that guide implementation of the No Child Left Behind law.

On NCLB, Duncan is a middle-of-the-roader [6]; he supports the law's goals of high expectations and accountability but has challenged Congress to improve it by doubling its funding and amending it "to give schools, districts, and states the maximum amount of flexibility possible."

Not the least of Duncan's hurdles will be the nation's preoccupation with the economic crisis. In a sign of the media's interest in education, the first question at Obama and Duncan's press conference after the announcement of Duncan's nomination was about the Federal Reserve Bank lowering its interest rates.

The financial squeeze hitting schools could hinder Duncan's efforts.

Making money and resources key to success, Duncan and Obama both made the case for education by defining it as the path to prosperity; Obama called it the "single biggest determinant" of the economy's long-term health.

"We're not going to transform every school overnight," Obama said. "What we can expect is that each and every day, we are thinking of new, innovative ways to make the schools better. That is what Arne has done. That's going to be his job. That's going to be his task."

Grace Rubenstein is a staff writer and multimedia producer at Edutopia.

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

School of the Future World Summit 2008

Evan Arthur - The Australian Digital Education Revolution

Martin Bean - What Technology Makes Possible

Randy Fielding - Design for the Creative Age - Part 1 (slides 1-49)

Randy Fielding - Design for the Creative Age - Part 2 (slides 50-75)

Randy Fielding - Design for the Creative Age - Part 3 (slides 76 - end)

Julio Fontan - Country Spotlight: Colombia

James Grant & Lee Burley - Building Schools for the Future

Bill Hill - The Digital Renaissance Age

Michael Horn - Disrupting Class

Allyson Knox - Career Forward

Victor McNair - Teacher E-Portfolios

Katrina Reynen - Innovation that Drives Transformation Across School Systems

Don Richardson - Innovation Management

Ratnasingam Selvarani & Angeline Fern - Transformational Learning - Part 1

Ratnasingam Selvarani & Angeline Fern - Transformational Learning - Part 2

Yasutaka Shimizu - NEXT Project - Part 1

Yasutaka Shimizu - NEXT Project - Part 2

Jaeshin Song - e-Learning of Korea

Wim Veen - Homo Zappiens: New Learning Strategies in a Digital Age

Tony Wagner - The Global Achievement Gap

Vivla VIVACE (Research Project?)

VIVACE: Slow Water Current Energy Mimics Schools of Fish

by Daniel Flahiff

vivace renewable energy, vortex hydro energy, vortex induced vibrations, clean tech, sustainable energy, green design, fish energy technology

Vivace is a new energy technology that gets its name from a phenomenon that engineers have been battling for 25 years. VIV (vortex induced vibrations) destroyed the Narrows Bridge in Washington State in 1940, and the Ferrybridge power station cooling towers in England in 1965. Ironically it is also the same phenomenon that allows schools of fish to swim as fast as they do. Now Dr. Michael M. Bernitsas and researchers at the University of Michigan are turning this ‘threat’ into a resource. Rather than suppressing VIV, Vivace actually creates and then harvests energy from VIV, and it does it all using slow water currents, a previously untapped source of sustainable energy.

vivace renewable energy, vortex hydro energy, vortex induced vibrations, clean tech, sustainable energy, green design, fish energy technology

Most of the water that covers 70% of our planet flows at less than 3 knots - too slowly to harvest its power using current technology. Wave and tidal turbines require an average of 5 or 6 knots to operate efficiently, as does the timeless watermill. But Vivace, the technology being developed by Dr. Michael M. Bernitsas at the University of Michigan, is designed to operate at currents of less than 2 knots, opening up a world of possible applications from river power and dam replacement to perpetually powered ocean sensors, uninterruptible power for vulnerable coastal facilities, and the supply of electricity to offshore facilities.

vivace renewable energy, vortex hydro energy, vortex induced vibrations, clean tech, sustainable energy, green design, fish energy technology

In its current configuration Vivace looks nothing like a fish (though Dr. Bernitsas says it likely will in the future) but more like a ladder with round, sliding rungs. Vivace exploits VIV by simply placing this ladder across a slow moving current which causes the rungs to oscillate up and down on springs. The oscillating movement creates mechanical energy which is then converted to electricity. The modules are designed to be reusable and are considered less of a threat to marine life than turbines because of their slow movement.

What will it cost? Estimates are coming in at about 5.5 cents per kilowatt hour. When compared with nuclear (4.6 cents a kilowatt hour) wind (6.9 cents a kilowatt hour) and solar (16 to 48 cents a kilowatt hour) Vivace looks like a serious competitor. Dr. Bernitsas’ company Vortex Hydro Energy is working to deploy a pilot project on the Detroit River within 18 months. Here’s hoping it goes ’swimmingly’!

+ University of Michigan

+ Vortex Hydro Energy

Via Eurekalert

vivace renewable energy, vortex hydro energy, vortex induced vibrations, clean tech, sustainable energy, green design, fish energy technology

vivace renewable energy, vortex hydro energy, vortex induced vibrations, clean tech, sustainable energy, green design, fish energy technology

Related Posts