New saltwater electrical generation could power submarines or medical devices
spectrum.ieee.org
spectrum.ieee.org
I think the quoted figure was meant to be in kW - a unit of power, which is a much more useful piece of information. I looked at the original paper (here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.13170.pdf) but couldn't find any reference to the 2kWh quoted from the researchers.
If the suggestion is correct, and a 10mx10m panel can generate 2kW, then there's some really interesting potential applications. History has shown that the path towards robust technology is normally by making things solid state - vacuum tubes to transistors, solar collectors to solar panels, even helicopters to drones all benefited from a huge decrease in mechanical complexity.
Quick dig shows this is one area of research that is ongoing.
Someday.
Maybe a good application would be throwing the whole rig into the surf, or a salty tidal stream, where you get the induced current from lunar power.
The 2018-2019 Kia Soul EV has a 81.4kW engine.
Don't forget that it is a sub and silent running is likely way more valuable than fast running (nobody is saying they can't have two methods of propulsion)
Also, I don't know anything about this USS Seawolf - is it a nuclear sub? IIRC the problem with them is that the pumps cooling the atomic core can't be shut down, meaning there is always detectable sound. Would a hose with this material on the inside be able to pump cooling water silently? Don't forget that the 'pump' in that case could be almost the entire length of the sub..
It's very relevant as it gives a sense of scale of the issue and how little power is actually produced.
> The relevant comparision is the required power to push the USS Seawolf forward and what speed can you get with 84kW
Since you're apparently checking all my comments you've likely seen Gotland's 2x75kW AIP gives it a top speed of 5kn. These 85kW would be a smidge above half that on a submarine about 6 times the weight. The relationship is probably somewhat non-linear but I'd say the result would be around "geriatric pacing".
> Don't forget that it is a sub and silent running is likely way more valuable than fast running (nobody is saying they can't have two methods of propulsion)
You could get about the same effect by just shutting down propulsion entirely.
> Also, I don't know anything about this USS Seawolf - is it a nuclear sub? IIRC the problem with them is that the pumps cooling the atomic core can't be shut down, meaning there is always detectable sound.
That doesn't seem to have any relevance to my point that this tech doesn't seem able to actually provide propulsion for a sub'.
> Would a hose with this material on the inside be able to pump cooling water silently? Don't forget that the 'pump' in that case could be almost the entire length of the sub..
You do realise there's other shit in a sub than just reactor cooling systems right?
So yeah 80KW won’t be enough to power the lights.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Seawolf , presumably we're talking about the fourth (and current one). Yes, it's nuclear powered.
> IIRC the problem with them is that the pumps cooling the atomic core can't be shut down, meaning there is always detectable sound.
AFAIK current generation US and Russian (and presumably other navies operating nuclear subs too) nuclear subs can shut down the primary coolant pumps and rely on convection at low power. As long as they're cruising along at low speed they can be very quiet.
IEEE is really hurting their image with these poorly written clickbait headlines. While an interesting idea if it can't even produce enough power for a lightbulb it's not going t obe powering submarines or medical devices anytime soon.
>as much as 2-5 kilowatt-hours of electrical power
>could power submarines
Not really. I don't know about non-nuclear subs, but this is several orders of magnitude too low to be space effective for use on subs. I cant find any official public info, but suffice it to say subs run closer to 2MWs than 2KWs
> and even (running the process in reverse) a silent propulsion system for boats or submarines.
So the submarine would have on-board power generation that powers this, not that this would provide the power to the submarine.
10x10m for 2kW is 2kW per 100sqm.
That's pretty much nothing, propulsion-wise. A seawolf-sized sub (108m long and 12m wide) covered in this material would produce about 85kW. That's around the powertrain of a modern compact / city car: the nissan leaf's motor is 80kW.
It's not meant to produce energy in this case. That's what I'm saying.
An 85kW engine.
Which is — as I noted — about what you'd find on a compact EV (that's about 115hp).
Depends on the sub class. Midget subs are in the (tens of) kW range.
Attack subs are going to be in the MW to tens of MW at the shaft (though it can be lower for special cases e.g. Gotland's AIP is 2x75kW, the sub crawls at 5kn on AIP though).
Moving water generates electrical currents, this is a pretty standard physics demonstration and how lightning works. This is perhaps a novel way of utilizing that property with thin conductive films.
It fails to mention if water flow can be continuous or has to be droplets and flow speed/salt content required for that generation.
Running in reverse to generate propulsion is also mentioned. Covering a submarine and just moving a thin layer of water out of the way to move forward is a super interesting application.
Small drones that patrol the ocean for long times would be a cool application. Move a bit until the batteries are nearly depleted, float around to recharge, and then resume moving.
Also those films will rust completely off the slide in a matter of hours.
Edit in the case of iron, a 20nm film would fully corrode in about 20 min using a corrosion rate of 0.55mm/y
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
and
Red October