What is Digg?127 Comments
- metaliq, on 06/04/2008, -0/+32Only if they flew into it.
- akatherder, on 06/04/2008, -0/+31Yes, just like trees are dangerous to motorists.
- thestrongrope, on 06/04/2008, -1/+28I love seeing all the new ideas that are coming out for renewable energy that are breaking the old stereotypes of how our energy devices need to look. This is what happens when people stop bitching and start taking action and designing something truly inspiring.
- rawg, on 06/04/2008, -1/+21Great idea. They should tie a bunch of these together into an array for even more efficiency. Then they could put a platform on top and build a house in the sky.
- thestrongrope, on 06/04/2008, -1/+20Man if some birds can't avoid a giant floating stationary balloon, they really have no business flying!
- Designliving, on 06/04/2008, -0/+19This is awesome - how close to reality is this design?
- inactive, on 06/04/2008, -0/+18Enough to make Barry White sound like Verne Troyer.
- db0255, on 06/04/2008, -1/+19Aren't turbines heavy? I mean, how much helium would you have to put in it?
- inactive, on 06/04/2008, -1/+18What are you talking about? A whole bunch of these things floating in the air would look AWESOME.
- apoupada, on 06/04/2008, -1/+15Wouldn't this be a danger to airplanes and helicopters?
- Carl306, on 06/04/2008, -1/+11I was waiting for someone to bring this up. At least in my opinion, seeing a few blimps in the sky here and there as opposed to the entire skyline covered in smog makes me a happy camper.
- thestrongrope, on 06/04/2008, -0/+9I am sure they would put it into an area that was a no fly zone or something so that there would be no collisions. I doubt people would just be throwing these things up where ever they want.
- onionoino, on 06/04/2008, -0/+8look at blimps and zeppelins they could hold aloft a considerable amount of weight. and there are better lightweight materials today.
- greentime, on 06/04/2008, -1/+9Very cool concept, and it looks totally feasible.
- Shiftgood, on 06/04/2008, -0/+7oh the irony of it all.
- TheCarDude, on 06/04/2008, -1/+8Pretty Cool Idea. You could even anchor hundreds of them in the middle of the ocean.
- n1eb, on 06/04/2008, -0/+7I'm skeptical to believe that this thing would float considering the weight of two generators, the baloon itself, plus 1000+ feet of cable large enough to supply the electricity. If the generators are lightweight, how could they possibly supply a meaningful amount of electricity?
- GreatGiftPicks, on 06/04/2008, -2/+9There are so many possibilities. From childhood, I couldn't figure out why the grownups weren't doing SOMETHING to save our resources and be more efficient. Now I know that it always comes down to dollars and cents. Are people (corporations and governmnents and the powers that be) ready to invest in the future of the planet and make this kind of stuff happen on a big scale around the world? I'm not so sure. But I'm all for it : ) Everyone who reads this message: I encourage you to do your part from now on - recycle, consume less, switch to energy efficient appliances and lights, make sure your car tires stay at the optimal pressure, and find ways to help your family and society stop wastefulness.
- TheUngod, on 06/04/2008, -1/+7Moreso if they used Hydrogen. That would be one crazy fireworks show.
- rawg, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6The really cool thing is that you could probably move them around. Build a large array of these turbines tied together, then fly them to the middle of the ocean, deep desert or arctic wasteland and anchor them for a while.
The only problem would be getting them connected to the power grid. Perhaps they can be designed to produce and store hydrogen from water vapor in the air, which could be periodically harvested rather than just generating electricity.
And of course, you would have to build a house on top. - zacharytelschow, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6or planes.
- inactive, on 06/04/2008, -1/+7in big cities you can probably also sell ad space on them.
- sulthernao, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6If we could harness the energy from the lightning...
- digdug2020, on 06/04/2008, -1/+7Why don't you do us all a favor and take your cynicism and move into a cave and "live off the land". That way you won't be offending Gaea any longer with your parasitic human existence.
- BoneheadFarker, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6Why the middle of nowhere? I'm thinking about tethering them to tall buildings in the city. Less distance between generation and use, and easier access for maintenance. Plus this way they could be sold to large corporations outside of the energy sector, given the incentive of selling the surplus back to the grid. Though you might have to contend with idiots trying to shoot them down...
- ho0ber, on 06/04/2008, -0/+5@JohnnyXmas
Hence the *IF* we could harness it. He isn't questioning the practicality of harnessing it, but how much energy it could offer *IF* we could. - JohnnyXmas, on 06/04/2008, -0/+5. . .helium does not "run out." It's not a a chemical reaction, it's an inert gas that's just lighter than our atmosphere as a whole. If you're thinking of kids' helium balloons, they "run out" because they're not 100% perfectly airtight.
- buba1243, on 06/04/2008, -1/+6Wow are you retarded? A generator creates electrical current.
- Peko, on 06/04/2008, -0/+5Soon as they figure out how to make a very light generator.
Lighter than air blades? I can get that. But the design is lacking that heavy ass generator required to turn the mechanical spinning energy and turn it into electricity.
Flagged as VC bait vapourware, unless somebody corrects me. - metaliq, on 06/04/2008, -0/+5So what would happen if it were to be struck by lightning?
- inactive, on 06/04/2008, -1/+6I take it that this thing will be moving pretty violently that high in the air, and birds don't like things that move around, so that's a non-issue.
- sentinel106, on 06/04/2008, -0/+5600 feet is pretty low flying for a plane, besides the fact that they'd obviously not have them around airports
- inactive, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4anything with wires = bad ..... not all planes fly at that altitude and definitely not helicopters ...
- Andrwmorph, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4Or over the ocean
- TrevorPace, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4All a turbine is is a magnet spinning in a coil of wire...or vice versa. So in theory they wouldn't have to be that heavy. But my only concern is the energy lost in the tether. As well as the fact that Helium will leak out of most containers.
- JohnnyXmas, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4. . .at the same point at which the car reaches 88 miles per hour. . .
- sentinel106, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4I'm not a pilot, but considering commercial planes fly at around 32,000 feet I'd say these things are in no danger unless they're near airports
- Ramble, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4Hard to read if it's so high and spinning.
- xexx, on 06/04/2008, -1/+5Pretty cool idea, though I think we'd be better off putting wind turbines on all the skyscrapers first and then worrying about how to put them in the sky without a foundation...
- inactive, on 06/04/2008, -0/+4By lowering your electric bill.
- dotCOMmie, on 06/04/2008, -3/+6The path of least resistance would be to turn this thing 90 degrees and then it would not spin. How do you counteract this when its tied down by just 1 wire? And even if you attach it by 2 it will still twist. Seems like there was little thought put into the design.
Also since when is helium a renewable resource. It tends to attain escape velocity and thus leaves earth -- for all intents and purposes. - bman85, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3Whats the big idea here? Trying to start some sort of revolution, one Digg comment at a time? Whats your point? Whats the "punchline"
- bgrah449, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3Or (even closer to my dream) put a casino onboard and paint the word "The Falcon" on the back.
- Peko, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3I'm repeating myself but the design is lacking that heavy ass generator required to turn the mechanical spinning energy and turn it into electricity.
Flagged as VC bait vapourware, unless somebody corrects me. - diggmaddy, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3@JohnnyXmas
"If they could use it, they wouldn't be grounding it."
You contradict yourself with this last statement. Think, think... - zacharytelschow, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3They could always reel them in if the weather gets bad.
- eddiecamaro, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3There are radio antennas that are around that height. I'm sure there will be those blinking red lights on them even if they are in a no fly zone just as a safety precaution for small aircraft without advanced instrumentation. I bet it is even possible for the units to have a radio transmitted warning beacon if an aircraft comes within a certain radius. Im pretty sure theyll have every safety measure covered. Only thing we have to worry about is making sure these things are put in place.
- Ninnux, on 06/04/2008, -0/+3I'm sure there's some kind of lightning rod structure built into these.
There's a misunderstanding about lightning rods. They're pointy, made of metal, and on the tallest of structures specifically to draw electrons off of clouds (the trickle effect) before a net charge in the cloud becomes dangerously large and discharges all the energy at once (lightning bolt). If a lightning bolt actually ever struck a lightning rod with full force, it would vaporize both the rod and its ground wire.
Same holds true for these things. I'm sure some kind of structure will be built into them so that they are constantly leeching off electrons from nearby clouds. One could envision this supplemental direct current boosting the efficiency of the turbines somehow. - DNABeast, on 06/05/2008, -0/+2Imagine if something got into the gears. The whole thing would just wind down to the anchor point. Have fun getting the knots out of that.
- Lust4Me, on 06/04/2008, -0/+2Direct link to the website:
http://www.magenn.com/
That picture looks real - wonder why only concept art was included in that other article. O.o -
Show 51 - 100 of 133 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is