Engineer Creates "FREE ENERGY" Battery Charger

[TheDoLittle]

Well, not "free energy" in the woo terms we're used to.

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1671670...es-aa-batteries-from-electromagnetic-fields#2

Seems he created a charger that picks up static electricity from surrounding EM fields to charge a small battery. If you watch the video he is even able to collect a charge by just petting his dog.

His personal website is here: http://dennissiegel.de/electromagnetic-harvester/

 

[Turgor]

It looks like a cool idea, until you realize he created something that leeches power from frequencies that are used for wireless networks (amongst others). I don't want some guy slowly charging his batteries on my wireless communications. I doubt this device would pass regulatory standards in the EU.

 

[Floyt]

Hook up the average Persian kitten, get a 5-year old girl over, and watch the watts roll in!

 

[catsmate]

1. It's not "static" electricity it's EMF.
2. The idea isn't new, Nokia demonstrated something similar a few years ago.
3. The pictures illustrating that article show the inventor using the device near electrical infrastructure (power lines and a transformer station), i.e. inductively stealing power. Also not a new idea. Or legal.
4. The article starts by repeating the speculation about the influence of lead on crime rate and them stretches this to include em emissions. This sets my woo alarm off and causes me to wonder about its validity as a source.

 

[Cuddles]

If you watch the video he is even able to collect a charge by just petting his dog.

Actually, it doesn't. What it shows is that a device with a battery in it is able to make an LED light up when you pet a dog. Think how much work you need to do to charge a wind-up torch. Now think how much work you do petting a dog. Unless you're petting that dog really hard, it's simply not possible to get a useful amount of energy out of doing so. Even assuming it's not a straight up scam using the battery to power an EMF detector, there's no way he was actually charging the battery by petting the dog. All it shows is that it's possible to detect varying EM fields and make a light come on when you do.

So basically, it's either useless because the power sources aren't anywhere near powerful enough, or extremely illegal as others have already pointed out.

The sad part is, he may well think this is actually a brilliant and original idea. From the article:

Still, designing the harvesters was "really time-consuming and expensive" for the non-engineer. "It was quite hard to find out the correct lengths and coil windings," he says, "especially to make the whole system suitable for a larger field of frequencies."

This is not something that would be at all time-consuming or expensive to make, it's just that a photography degree doesn't teach you how to do it so had to figure it out himself. Still, he has to get some respect for actually having an idea and going through with it successfully, even though it turns out not to be as good as he thought. Hopefully it won't take him too long to realise that and turn his skills to something more useful.

 

[Checkmite]

3. The pictures illustrating that article show the inventor using the device near electrical infrastructure (power lines and a transformer station), i.e. inductively stealing power. Also not a new idea. Or legal.

I'm not sure that inductively creating power using EMF freely radiating from a transmission line could legally be portrayed as theft of service, since power companies do not offer power by induction. The power company would have to prove that watts are measurably being consumed from the line service itself that wouldn't be getting consumed if no one was there inductively gathering electricity. The person inductively "stealing" power radiated from lines is analogous to a guy going through your trash after you've left it on the curb, which courts have ruled is not illegal.

4. The article starts by repeating the speculation about the influence of lead on crime rate and them stretches this to include em emissions. This sets my woo alarm off and causes me to wonder about its validity as a source.

I'm dubious enough about the lead connection, having only seen it covered in one non-science magazine; however, the premise for inferring the connection is that crime rates have gone down as lead exposure rates have gone down. Our use of infrastructure and devices that use and radiate EM has only gone up; therefore if there is a connection, crime rates should be going up as well. They're not; they're going down. The only inferences one could draw from this fact are that EM either has no effect on the crime rate at all, or it has a positive effect, making people less likely to commit crimes.

 

[JDC]

Hook up the average Persian kitten, get a 5-year old girl over, and watch the watts roll in!

Kitty Pwer!



Frii Energyz!

 

[Checkmite]

I don't want some guy slowly charging his batteries on my wireless communications.

Meh. If it's not keeping my phone call from connecting and his device isn't converting my communications into listenable form, I honestly don't care. Cell towers radiate your signal in all directions, not just toward the phone you're calling. If there's a way that extra radiated signal can be put to not-eavesdropping use by someone, they may consider themselves my guest.

 

[catsmate]

I'm not sure that inductively creating power using EMF freely radiating from a transmission line could legally be portrayed as theft of service, since power companies do not offer power by induction. The power company would have to prove that watts are measurably being consumed from the line service itself that wouldn't be getting consumed if no one was there inductively gathering electricity. The person inductively "stealing" power radiated from lines is analogous to a guy going through your trash after you've left it on the curb, which courts have ruled is not illegal.

I believe there have been prosecutions for electricity theft by inductive methods. I'll see if I can find more.

I'm dubious enough about the lead connection, having only seen it covered in one non-science magazine; however, the premise for inferring the connection is that crime rates have gone down as lead exposure rates have gone down. Our use of infrastructure and devices that use and radiate EM has only gone up; therefore if there is a connection, crime rates should be going up as well. They're not; they're going down. The only inferences one could draw from this fact are that EM either has no effect on the crime rate at all, or it has a positive effect, making people less likely to commit crimes.

The inclusion of these really dubious references in the opening of the article made me wonder if the article should be given any credence.

 

[rjh01]

Mythbusters have visited this sort of thing

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/free-energy.htm

Watch the video. Ignore the first few seconds where they mention that there is no "free energy". They put up coils near a high voltage power line. They do get power. However it is not very much. This shows that the device in the OP will not work.

 

[GodMark2]

I'm not sure that inductively creating power using EMF freely radiating from a transmission line could legally be portrayed as theft of service, since power companies do not offer power by induction. The power company would have to prove that watts are measurably being consumed from the line service itself that wouldn't be getting consumed if no one was there inductively gathering electricity. The person inductively "stealing" power radiated from lines is analogous to a guy going through your trash after you've left it on the curb, which courts have ruled is not illegal.

It's more analogous to someone tapping into your water main and taking a trickle off before it gets to your house.

See, though the EM field exists around the electric lines all the time. It takes a certain amount of energy to set up when the current starts, but gives that energy back in when the current stops and the field collapses. This happens twice every 60Hz cycle. But, if someone takes that power out of the field and stores it in their battery, it's no longer available to go back into the line. The total amount of power supplied by the electric company must then increase to offset this loss.

Sounds like theft to me.

 

[Cuddles]

Meh. If it's not keeping my phone call from connecting and his device isn't converting my communications into listenable form, I honestly don't care. Cell towers radiate your signal in all directions, not just toward the phone you're calling. If there's a way that extra radiated signal can be put to not-eavesdropping use by someone, they may consider themselves my guest.

The problem is - how exactly do you separate out the useful signal from the waste? A device such as this will simply absorb all (not really, but efficiency isn't relevant to this point) the radiation impinging on it. It has no idea if that's wasted signal that was intended for a phone in the opposite direction, or if it's intercepting a signal that was aimed directly at the correct phone. Unless it can somehow tell the difference, it's going to affect your signal. Importantly, even if it could tell the difference, it would have to do so without absorbing any of the signal at all, which is not physically possible, otherwise it's always going to affect the signal. And while one device may have a relatively low chance of intercepting a useful signal and a relatively small effect when it does, there's a very real slippery slope here. If one device is allowed and is useful, there will soon be millions of them in constant use all across the country, at which point the effect will no longer be small.

Secondly, have a look at the video again. Note that it doesn't show the LED flashing when he's just waving it around, it very deliberately shows it flashing when he brings it near someone's phone. In other words, it's not gathering energy from the signal cell towers transmit, which is extremely weak, it's gathering energy from the signal the phone transmits. Modern phones automatically adjust signal strength depending on external factors. By absorbing the energy a phone is transmitting, you will cause the battery to drain faster because the phone will increase the signal strength to compensate. In other words, this device isn't gathering up stray energy that would otherwise have gone to waste, it's leeching power from unsuspecting strangers' phones.

 

[Mr. Scott]

It's more analogous to someone tapping into your water main and taking a trickle off before it gets to your house.

See, though the EM field exists around the electric lines all the time. It takes a certain amount of energy to set up when the current starts, but gives that energy back in when the current stops and the field collapses. This happens twice every 60Hz cycle. But, if someone takes that power out of the field and stores it in their battery, it's no longer available to go back into the line. The total amount of power supplied by the electric company must then increase to offset this loss.

Sounds like theft to me.

That's right.

A tiny amount of theft is still theft. Taking power out of the air like this increases the load on the power source, and enough devices skimming wireless signals will interfere with the communication. Either way, it's clearly illegal and unethical.

Say, if you bring your battery charger up to a power transformer handling 10,000 watts for a home, and your charger pulls 2 watts from the air near the transformer, then the transformer would be pulling 10,002 watts from the grid, sending 9,998 watts to the home, or some combination (e.g. 10,001 used, 9,999 passed on).

 

[CORed]

I'm not sure that inductively creating power using EMF freely radiating from a transmission line could legally be portrayed as theft of service, since power companies do not offer power by induction.
...

O rly? How do you think transformers work?

 

[phunk]

O rly? How do you think transformers work?

Came to say the same thing, beaten by 9 minutes.

 

[catsmate]

Here is a an article about Nokia's experimentation with similar technology three years ago.

 

[Jodie]

I think it should be hooked up to a hamster exercise wheel with the hamster running on it.

 

[Brian-M]

Mythbusters tried something similar about 5 years ago, although they were trying to get power from the power lines rather than wireless communications.

 

[marting]

I stopped at a road off in the boonies where power lines crossed and went for miles. A great photog opp. I parled right underneath the lines. At some point I noticed a siginficant AC on the car. When I would touch the car there was a very noticable AC probably around 40 to 60 V like one gets on an appliance that isn't grounded. Interesting affect. Wish I'd had a voltmeter.

Tapping off the magnetic field is more problematic since the whole point of HV lines is to move at higher voltages instead of current and the B field component is from the B flux. That will also attenuate faster than the E field. Probably the best way to tap power would be a mesh of chicken wire off the ground covering as big an area as one could arrange. Probably could get some usable energy. Well, enough to light an LED. No way you can power a home off it.

 

[Mr. Scott]

This suggests how you could get free lighting for your home if you built it under high tension wires. Not sure if you could get usable current, though.

BTW: This is a great trilogy from the BBC "The Story of Electricity"

Skip to 02:10