New Technology Can Turn Heat Waste Into Electricity
Great news on the power efficiency front: Scientists have invented a new material that can efficiently convert heat waste in cars, power generators, and heat pumps into electricity. The new material is thermoelectric, and can turn heat into energy without any pollution.
The invention, thallium-doped lead telluride, is twice as efficient as the second most efficient material used in thermoelectric power. The lead telluride creates electric power like a conventional heat engine coupled to an electric generator, but uses electrons as the working fluid instead of water or gas. Additionally, it creates electricity directly.
Most importantly, the material is most effective between 450 and 950° Fahrenheit. This is a typical temperature range for many power systems, including car engines.
- » Read more on efficiency
- » See peer reviews of Efficient Appliances, Lighting, and more at Green Home
Many experts argue that up to 60 percent of a gasoline engine’s energy is lost through waste heat, so a thermoelectric device using lead telluride would be a welcome addition to any car. Such devices have no moving parts; this means that wear and tear is virtually non-existent.
Research project leader Joseph Heremans of Ohio State University is optimistic about the future of thermoelectric nanotechnology—he hopes to boost the efficiency rating of the new material by a factor of two. For now, though, we can be content with the incredible new technology created by Heremans and team.
Posts Related to Alternative Energy Sources:
- Texas To Build Wind Power Superhighway
- Wind-Powered Tall Ships Are Once Again Important As Oil Prices Hurt Trade
- AquaSystem Makes Solar Thermal Accessible To The Masses
Photo Credit: Vladimir Jovovic
Oops, missed the thallium doping part. That is a little sketchy. As the article states though, there are other materials and this is an area of active research, so other possibilities are undoubtedly on the horizon.
Although you are correct in stating lead and thallium are both hazardous substances, such statements need to be considered in proportion to the risk involved.
More lead is used in one car battery than would be used in a lot of these thermoelectric devices (probably hundreds of the devices).
Thallium is currently used in the semiconductor industry. Everyone’s cell phone, digital camera, TV, computer, etc. etc. probably has some thallium used for the semiconductors in those devices. Some thallium compounds are more dangerous than others (I don’t know how dangerous the thallium compounds used in this thermoelectric device would be. Some ultra clear glass has thallium in the mix.
This is great technology!
For example power produced with coal and nuclear energy uses a steam cycle. After the steam leaves the turbine it needs to be condensed back into water. Huge wast of energy; on the order of %60 total heat into steam cycle goes right on out in the cooling water. Using this material, could increase the output of current power stations by capturing that wast energy, so we have to build less power stations.
Personally I’d rather have lead where I know it is, and can be easily recycled; rather than carbon dioxide going up the stacks.
This just might be the answer for Hawaii’s energy consumption, we got none stop super hot volcanic activity.
There does seem like a few anomalies which could hinder production and productivity of this device, but it’s certainly the ‘beginnings’ of technological breakthrough.
peletier effect , not new
The innovation we are seeing today is awesome. one more way to diversify our energy resources.
larryhagedon
American Flex Fuel Experience.
AmericanFFE-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
What do those numbers 0.75 and 1.5 mean? Without units, I have no idea. If they are % efficiency, it is terrible.
The BMW steam engine exhaust cogenerator is already better, at 15%:
http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/
See this page
http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/07/high-temperature-thermoelectric-at-zt.html
for a chart on how zT relates to actual thermal effiency. Basically, “The current commercial best ZT figure of 0.7 meant 5-10% recapture of energy from heat at 200-300 degrees temp difference. 1.5 means 12-18% recapture of energy from heat for 300-600K degree temperature differences.”
Lots of terms like TWICE AS EFFICIENT as the runner up.
But nowhere I can find that they give the efficiency.
(Nor do they state the runner up so that I could actually compute it myself.)