SOLO-TREC: A new perpetual motion machine?

Well, no, physics has proven that a perpetual motion machine can’t exist. In other words, a machine cannot produce more energy than it consumes. However, NASA and the US Navy have engineered a new underwater vehicle that produces electrical energy by using an almost unlimited source of thermal energy: the ocean.

                The Sounding Oceanographic Lagrangrian Observer Thermal RECharging (SOLO-TREC) vehicle uses the difference of temperatures at different levels of the ocean to power the vehicle [2]. Because the vehicle uses the earth’s thermal energy to power its engine, the vehicle has an infinite energy source which will allow the vehicle to indefinitely map the ocean floor without the worry of running out of power. This achievement is important not only for the energy producing technology, but also for the vast amount of information that can be acquired by having machines that can theoretically run forever. It has been said that we know more about the surfaces of other planets than we do about the ocean on our own planet, and this advancement in technology is the first step to learning more about our own planet.

                So how is the earth’s thermal energy converted into electrical energy? The secret behind the technology are 10 external tubes that contain a waxy substance known as phase-change material [1]. When the material comes in contact with warm water, it melts and expands, and when it comes into contact with colder water, it solidifies and expands [1]. This expansion and contraction of the material pressurizes oil in the vehicle, and the pressurized oil gradually drives a hydraulic motor which produces electrical energy [1]. The hydraulic motor produces 1.7 watt-hours, or 6100 joules [2]. The electrical energy charges the vehicle’s battery, which controls another hydraulic system that monitors the engines float systems and changes the depth the vehicle is at. Using thermal energy, the vehicle has completed over 300 dives ranging from surface level to depths of 500 meters [1]. Aside from failures in the components, the only possibility for the vehicle to run out of energy is if the ocean runs out of thermal energy, which is very unlikely, to say the least. The SOLO-TREC constantly relays information to  oceanographers such as  the ocean’s salinity, pH levels, and other various other data which will help oceanographers understand and measure how the ocean influences climate [1][2].

                The thermal engine used in the SOLO-TREC is a first generation, and many engineers and scientist are excited about the numerous applications of the new technology [2]. The news articles about the SOLO-TREC have just recently come out, and I’m excited to see how the technology will improve and be implemented in other surveillance technologies. Google Earth has a plug in that allows users to follow the SOLO-TREC and monitor its progress, but the site seems to constantly be down, so don’t get your hopes up. The site can be found at: http://solo-trec.jpl.nasa.gov/SOLO-TREC/.

[1] Science Daily – http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100405142152.htm

[2] Pop Sci – http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-04/submarine-runs-eternally-thermal-power-ocean-currents

[3] Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/x-27597-Maritime-Headlines-Examiner~y2010m4d11-NASAs-SOLOTREC-Draws-Free-Energy-from-the-Ocean

Are Eco-towns a good idea?

An eco-town is exactly what it sounds like: a town built to provide housing for people while meeting rigorous criteria for green living. The concept of eco-towns currently used in the UK, and in 2007 a competition to build 10 eco-towns was sponsored by Department of Communities and Local Government [1].  The largest of these towns will provide affordable housing for approximately 20,000 people [1]. In order to be classified as an eco-town, the following criteria must be met:

• Affordable housing: a minimum of 30% affordable housing in each eco-town
• Zero-carbon: eco-towns must be zero-carbon over the course of a year (not including transport emissions)
• Green space: a minimum of 40% of eco-towns must be comprised of greenspace
• Waste and recycling: eco-towns must have higher recycling rates and make use of waste in new ways
• Homes: homes must reach Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 or higher (surprisingly not the highest standard available, casting doubt on the credibility of these requirements)
• Employment: at least one job opportunity per house accessible by public transport, walking or cycling (although the standards are silent on how housing developers might guarantee this and it is largely discredited in the current economic crisis)
• Services: there must be shops and a primary school within easy walk of every single home, and all the services expected from a town of up to 20,000 homes
• Transition/construction: facilities should be in place before and during construction
• Public transport: real-time public transport information in every home, a public transport link within ten minutes walk of every home
• Community: there must be a mixture of housing types and densities, and residents must have a say in how their town is run, by governance in new and innovative ways.

[Criteria taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-towns_(UK)]

However, while eco-towns initially were met with positive feedback, over the last couple of years there has been an increase in complaints and issues with how the UK’s government has been handling the regulation of the eco-towns. The number one complaint from environmentalist and skeptics is a lack of public transportation options for the towns [2]. The properties that will be used to build the eco-towns are located far from any neighboring cities and would require many of the residents to make long commutes to travel between cities. If the government doesn’t provide the appropriate public transportation, then the affect of building an eco-town is lost when the residents continually drive between towns and offset the benefit of living in an eco-town in the first place [2].

Another concern with eco-towns is that politicians and contractors are simply giving the title to a new town they are building in order to bypass normal regulations put on normal housing. [3] The land used for the eco-towns are large and open and normally would be hard to get permission from the city to build property on. However, if a contractor decides to make the town an eco-town, then the city will be more willing to allow production of new structures on the property [3]. An alternate option for land has been proposed to use brown fields, or fields that have been used for industry purposes that could be used instead of destroying greener property [3].

Eco-towns seem like a great idea, but only if executed correctly. However, the idea of a community that is completely green is the first stepping stone to making the entire planet a much greener place to life. Many skeptics claim that the idea of completely green community is too good to be true, and that while an eco-town might be possible on paper, the concept can never really come into reality. However, I feel that struggling to make an eco-town will only benefit people, whether or not the town succeeds or fails.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-towns_(UK)

[2] DCLG – Eco-town proposals find little support, ENDS Report (LexisNexis)

[3] Should plans for eco-towns be scrapped?, The Times (LexisNexis)