Wing Waves tap motion of the ocean

Wing Waves tap motion of the ocean

www.msnbc.msn.com

Two miles offshore of Fort Pierce, Fla., a pair of eight-foot-tall metal wings flap to and fro on the seabed, cradled by the ocean's swells.

This is not some underwater performance art. The point of the project is to demonstrate an alternative way to produce electricity that is clean, green and friendly to marine life.

The so-called Wing Waves work by tapping the elliptical motion of waves 30 feet to 60 feet beneath the surface and converting it into mechanical energy that can be used to generate power. Like offshore wind farms, the electricity produced at sea can be routed via cables

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.wusa9.com
www.mrec.umassd.edu
www.mygreentreasure.com
sebaicmet.com


Mod Edit: Review This Link: Instructions for the Breaking News Forums: Copy The Exact Headline

Disclaimer : While the latest new story is older than 48 Hours, I am updating the reader with insider information that the project is a success and I am at liberty to say this as of yesterday. Therefore, I feel that I meet the 48 hour guideline. If a moderator disagrees please feel free to U2U me before removing this thread as the information is extremely vital, and is directly in line with what this forum is about. Also, this topic is entirely new to this forum and has not been discussed before, therefore it is further neccessary to bring it to light.

I have been unable to discuss this technology for over two years, due to close involvement in the project and patents pending on it.

Lee Marcum is a family member of my wife's side and has worked vigorously alongside my father-in-law and briefly myself to create the prototype for this magnificent machinery which requires extremely low grade maintenence, operates on no outside power source, is completely green and totally non-intrusive.

This article has not made the mainstream media for many reasons, but I have recieved word that the project has run extremely well for one month without issue.

Lee Marcum, inventor, has a few more steps before we could see miles and miles of these devices in much larger scale being installed along our shore lines in the future.

He is currently in contracting negotiations with corporations, and governments of domestic and foreign origins. He is due to travel to those governments and corporations around the world at an undisclosed time very soon following the holiday season.

If this story is not the number one story of the year, there is a flaw in our mainstream media today. As mainstream media begins to pick up on this, I will post the videos and articles in this thread. I ask all readers in the ATS Community to contact your local news networks and direct them to the information and contact numbers. If you have any questions please feel free to ask myself, and I will do my best to direct you to the person(s) with the answer, or contact his company directly at :

sebaicmet.com...

Corporate Office
3058 Highland Oaks Terrace
Tallahassee, FL 32301
888-639-9073
[email protected]

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Although this method of energy collection is far better than other, if not used in moderation it will probably have some unforeseen consequences.

The current on the ocean floor has been doing "something" for a very long time now, and to take away some of the current for mechanical energy might create some unintended problems. Much like wind has a purpose to spread seeds etc, collecting that energy before it can "do its job" might create more problems than it solves.

Hopefully they don't over do it like we tend to "over do" everything and put a dent/hinder what it is those ocean currents have been doing for thousands of years.

I watched a small demo of this..well, not saw personally, but a video sometime back about someone on a dock making a really small version work.

It looks promising, but..well, its green endless energy technology..forgive me for the general understanding that this is going to end up collecting dust, or having a very minimal impact.

I hope I am wrong as usual, but meh, seen alot of talk of things to come..but until the fossle fuel dinosaur is defeated, I don't see big happenings with new energy tech that isn't also prohibitively expensive or inefficient.

But aces anyhow...now then, toss the design online and open source it before you get bought out by big oil and do something for humanity for once

reply to post by sbctinfantry

I am glad to hear of this tech being further utilized. We started taking advantage of this out here in Oregon and it had been a big hit. There is so much energy in waves and since most of the planet's surface is water, we should be taking advantage of it. Desalinization plants should start being used more too.
Thanks for a positive story sbct!

Construction has begun off Oregon on what would be the nation's first commercial wave-energy farm, said Sean O'Neill, president of the Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition, a Maryland-based trade association that promotes marine energy. It is planned to supply energy to about 400 homes.

www.usatoday.com...

Peace,
spec

I've seen this idea before, in Sweden we've had this commercial playing the whole year:



Translation:

1993 Rauno Koivosaaru was hit by the cargo-hatch of a wreckage that was rocked back and forth by the waves on the bottom. He had an idea. Imagine if we could harness the energy of the waves. Rauno started working. Thousands of hours. The result became an energy plant on the bottom of the sea. Completely soundless and invisible. Come along on the hunt for the energy of the future.

reply to post by sbctinfantry


I saw a short vid on tech like this some time ago and felt it had some of the best promise for "green energy". One of the added bonuses I see of this is that it is out of sight. Honestly, it seems like everyone says they want green energy - but they never want to see a solar panel or windmill.

One question - it mentions in the article that...

"If it's done correctly, the wings should last 20 years, but you have to have constant servicing," Wood said.

How much servicing are they talking about?

Also, how is the cost / benefit working out - how does the cost vs output of these compare to other energy sources.

I see where they actually attract fish. Heh - I'll be honest, "I'll be these also act as an artificial reef" was the first thought that came into my head when I saw the pic. Any trouble from fisherman's nets?

To the posters above, I have posted a detailed PDF in the additional links, I will repost here:

Basically the concept is a device that uses the sway of the waves at the sea floor to create energy with a system that I can not currently discuss past what you are willing to research in the PDF.

Furthermore, this project was slated to go into the water on November 5th, 2010, my uncle-in-law Lee Marcum's (inventor of the project) birthday. While I helped build the device, my help was minimal at best, and I understand much of how it works. To say this much, I have worked on many devices in the past at a machine shop, and this one is extremely low maintenence compared to the manpower and maintenence required to run the oil, gas, and electric industries. However, you must also consider that the energy created will be 100% free. There is no conversion to be made from one chemical compound to another, no risks of explosions, no need for thousands upon thousands of persons to maintain this or that every day.

The devices being tested in Florida now merely need to be cleaned, serviced and kept working. Imagine, and it is not hard to do for someone like me who has chemical plants just out of view from my very house, what the servicing of our feul industry and electrical grid costs. Also keep in mind that the industry sector is declining rapidly in our country, and this is an entirely new field, originating in the good United States, offering jobs that would otherwise never exist. Jobs that require training, schooling, expertise and good pay. Also, if something goes wrong in a chemical plant (research explosions and their frequency for about five minutes to be totally convinced never to work there, ever), oil refinery (BP Oil Disaster), and other disastrous elements of our oil to electricity evolution, and you can see that this would be far more preferrable to any current options.

I hold no misconceptions that this is some sort of green miracle, and honestly don't care much for green technology either way. I think that any technology that benefits mankind as a whole is incredible.

To the poster wondering if this would affect anything in terms of natures cycles, currents, and patterns. At the very least it would create something of a almost negligible wave break on the sea floor. The affects of this are entirely beneficial, and not whatsoever negative.

I hope that covers just about everything, any more questions please feel free to ask, and please review the PDF file. Any questions that I can not answer, or feel I am still not at liberty to discuss will be fielded to his company which is posted in the main thread.

Be advised, I am in no way making any money of this product, or it's endorsement. I prefer not to get my hopes up anyway. I merely think that this is a great thing and it has come a long way, touched my life personally for better and worse, and the protoype was built in total secrecy and transported out in the middle of the night in from my very own garage.

Originally posted by Frogs
reply to post by sbctinfantry

 

I saw a short vid on tech like this some time ago and felt it had some of the best promise for "green energy". One of the added bonuses I see of this is that it is out of sight. Honestly, it seems like everyone says they want green energy - but they never want to see a solar panel or windmill.

One question - it mentions in the article that...

"If it's done correctly, the wings should last 20 years, but you have to have constant servicing," Wood said.

How much servicing are they talking about?

Also, how is the cost / benefit working out - how does the cost vs output of these compare to other energy sources.

I see where they actually attract fish. Heh - I'll be honest, "I'll be these also act as an artificial reef" was the first thought that came into my head when I saw the pic. Any trouble from fisherman's nets?

I would like to reply specifically to your post because you asked very good questions. I have some answers, though if you want 100% correct answers I have referred you to their offices.

As far as being out of sight, you have to realize just how right you are. This answers both questions. First of all, being that it creates and artificial reef, it would actually create better fishing grounds for fisherman and increase population while also creating hot spots for them to zero in on. A partnership could be discussed between both parties where the fisherman would agree to not fish too deep (though I'm almost sure these are to be placed so deep the whole thing is a non-issue while fisherman will still reap the reward of an increased population) the company will agree to give them depths at which they can fix maximally and optimally at each level. A PR gain for the company, and a decrease in the amount of maintenence due to population control, an income gain for the fisherman and added stability due to more abundant fish populations, and finally a better bottom line on the electric bill for residents and lower costs at the fish market. Win/Win/Win I suppose, though I would fact check with the company to be sure. You can claim that as your own pitch and maybe get a job as it is somewhat a startup company. Everyone needs a PR rep. I'm personally not interested as I'm retired already.)

I think I already explained that while they are trying to be realistic, the proper approach would be to gauge the incredible amount that it costs to service the oil and gas industries compared to what it would cost to service this type of industry. I feel like they sold themselves short on that, and no one is implying that this would be 100% free technology, but I would contact them for a realistic number. My personal experience would put maintenence at divers to scrape any natural growth that would hinder the function of the device and making sure they are not buried, while certainly fixing any mechanical issues. Having said that, I helped to build the prototype, and most of the actual hardware is located in the small mechanism that is connected to the floating triangular structures. It is the powerhouse and after seeing the components (I am not at liberty to discuss the actual mechanisms), I will say that the protypes version of the mechanism cost under a few hundred dollars. You can imagine how little it would be to replace the entire device at those rates. We can conclude that the operating costs, though frequent by some standards, would be far less if even every day the mechanisms had to be replaced every five years on average. The real costs is probably found in keeping moving parts moving, but the benefit there is that there is no hydraulic or toxic compounds or fluids used in their creation so pollutants is an actual ZERO. I hope that helps, again any further questions that I can not answer should be directed toward the company and I am not a spokesperson or PR rep. I just know what I know.

Originally posted by Frogs
reply to post by sbctinfantry

"If it's done correctly, the wings should last 20 years, but you have to have constant servicing," Wood said.

One last reply is in order :

Also, the term "wings" refer to the wooden structures you see on the prototype that catch the wave. The actual material may vary, but it is not an expensive part to replace by any means. Constant servicing would more than likely (in my opinion, if you need further answers see the contact information) be nothing more than replacing that part. In the prototype we used wood because it's cheap, it floats, and if it does break off in a storm it won't hurt the environment.

Great innovation! I could see this working in rivers as well.
Let's hope this makes a dent in the energy revolution.
Good on everyone involved with this project

Quite an annoying move of this post, yet again. I made it very clear that I would appreciate being contacted before such a move is made as more breaking news will more than likely show up on the MSM, as well as other information I may become privy to. Alas, TPTB feel the need to derail the topic and move it here for no stated reason other than, I can and I did. Annoying, indeed.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Great innovation! I could see this working in rivers as well.
Let's hope this makes a dent in the energy revolution.
Good on everyone involved with this project

edit on 24-12-2010 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)

I have to point out, AHHHH Snakes in a post. Two is certainly an interesting coincidence.

You hopes are mine as well! However, I do not see this working in a river due to the technology relying on the back and forth motion of waves. While they vary greatly on the ocean and river surfaces, the ocean floor is extremely calm in comparison. That is the only place technology like this could be viable.

Consider the annoyance of having to navigate around these structures in a river, or near major shipping lanes. Consider somehow using this technology on the surface of the waves, as opposed to below and you can start to see that it would be very much an eyesore and less efficient. This technology is more reliable than the gulf stream.

Originally posted by TheLaughingGod
I've seen this idea before, in Sweden we've had this commercial playing the whole year:

Translation:

1993 Rauno Koivosaaru was hit by the cargo-hatch of a wreckage that was rocked back and forth by the waves on the bottom. He had an idea. Imagine if we could harness the energy of the waves. Rauno started working. Thousands of hours. The result became an energy plant on the bottom of the sea. Completely soundless and invisible. Come along on the hunt for the energy of the future.

edit on 24-12-2010 by TheLaughingGod because: (no reason given)

Neat video, however his technology clearly uses pollution causing hydraulic fluid as well other components. Furthermore, this design was in the works before then and it definately does prove one thing. Great minds think alike, and at least we can say that we are on the right track.

reply to post by sbctinfantry


I work in hydraulics and he doesn't have to use petroleum based oils, vegetable oil would work.

I could see this application being used by the military, if they are on an island base and need energy for equipment.

Originally posted by Optix
reply to post by sbctinfantry

 

I work in hydraulics and he doesn't have to use petroleum based oils, vegetable oil would work.

I could see this application being used by the military, if they are on an island base and need energy for equipment.

edit on 25-12-2010 by Optix because: (no reason given)

Keep in mind the prototype was built to a reduced scale merely to test it's funcion and was made completely from parts found in a hardware store.

The working equipment will be far larger and produce a near endless supply that may cost money to maintain, but yield higher bottom lines that current petroleum based electricity and hydroelectricity, while having almost zero impact on the enviroment except in the positive.

Finally, the most interested buyers are foreign and domestic government, with contractors working for said buyers lining up to do the actual work.

I would like to take any thoughts on this project, answer what questions I can and also wonder if I could get some math guru in here to crunch the numbers as far as energy output versus energy output of more pollutant causing means.

Basically, I'm posing my own question about cost versus benefit. The reason for this is because I believe Mr. Marcum has vastly undercut himself in this area and I think it is our duty to provide him with some numbers that can easily be grasped in a way that shows how after everything is said and done, this energy production is cheaper and more efficient.

Comapny is doing well, and is considering moving to Texas where there is more interest from government and investors. It's comical that the rest of America is rejecting industry and relying on states like Texas to carry them.

Investors are being gathered up, and we should see this catch on to MSM as soon as the company is ready.

Quite an undertaking. However, I am sincerely convinced the most cost efficient, green, and useful new alternative energy source is Thorium plasma batteries - if we can get them out of the selfish hands of our military. These batteries operate 5-10 years without single recharge, zero emissions, and can be regulated for any ac/dc voltage output with less than a .002% fluctuation in current. fairy tale? No - reality. See this link and search Zimbio for more details as well.

open.salon.com...

This disruptive new technology poses a direct threat to big oil and government fuel tax revenues. Just like the magnatron magnetic motor that was invented and successfully demonstrated to Greyhound Bus Lines by Howard Rory Johnson in the late 70s, Thorium Plasma Battery technology is being censored from the public, under the ruse of "military priority" and "national security needs". In reality, these batteries can power anything from a cell phone, to laptop, to electric scooter, cars, trucks, and even an entire home or hospital. Dozens of people witnessed the battery in operation at demonstrations - before it was swiped by the Pentagon which also sealed the patent files. Imagine driving your car for 5 years without buying another gallon of gas or recharging the battery. For the corporate elite, it simply is not profitable for them to let us enjoy such technology that put an end to their gravy train ride. BTW... these plasma batteries would eliminate every coal plant within 2 years, and cut global warming by 50% within a decade.

Technology suppression is very real in our world and the profiteering of a few hundred elite keeps us all artificially addicted to oil. Our beloved government is the pusher for the biggest drug dealer of all - big oil.

An excellent piece of engineering, and a great idea. However, I'm not as optimistic as you regarding the reaction of fishermen to the project. Areas where these machines are installed would effectively have to become no-take zones. The vast majority of coastal fishing utilises trawling, which is obviously impossible with these things on the bottom, not to mention the maintenance crews in the area. Even longline fishing at shallower depths would be extremely risky. One broken line could wreck a whole series of these machine in one fell swoop.

Unfortunately, the no-take zones that already exist, or are being planned, can't be used either as the impetus for their creation is marine conservation, to preserve pre-existing habitats and allow fish stocks to recover. I'm afraid that the disruption to marine life due to the installation and maintenance of these machines would dissuade the conservationists from approving the scheme. You could end up with both the fishermen and the marine conservationists fighting you tooth and nail. Both have powerful lobby groups.

I sincerely wish you and the others involved every success, and hope you can overcome the inertia and vested interests that will inevitably stand in your way.