[Polina]

I have an idea about alternative energy sources. The idea may sound stupid or may not. Well, everybody knows about power plants built on rivers, which use the difference in water level to power the turbines. Why not built the power plant which uses the ocean’s current energy? Gulf stream…”The Gulf Stream is bigger than the combined flow of the Mississippi, the Nile, the Congo, the Amazon, the Volga, the Yangtze and many other major rivers of the world. The best technical estimate is that one hundred thousand million tons of warm salt water flow between Florida and the Bahamas every hour. At 235 gallons per ton, we have 235 x 1010 gallons per hour flowing between two and five miles per hour northward. This flow has been estimated to be about twenty times greater than all the fresh water in the world flowing into the oceans of the world from rain, rivers, and melting ice.This great mass of flowing water, or energy, has no beginning or ending, for its waters flow continuously northward along our east coast then east across the North Atlantic to the coasts of Europe and the United Kingdom, where it turns south and flows along western Europe and Africa, before again turning westward across the South Atlantic to the Caribbean basin. So, we basically have a continuous source of energy that moves the estimated one hundred thousand million tons of water (100,000,000,000 [1010]) past Miami at the rate of two to five miles per hour?” This is perhaps the greatest simple source of power in the world… And why we are not using it???

[dub_scratch]

I don't want to burst your bubble, but surcharging the golf stream would be too difficult and it would have very negative consequences if it were possible.

The energy source of the golf stream is like most: to dispersed to harness. This is the same problem as if we were to try to harness the energy in hurricanes or continental freeze thaw cycles. To a lessor extent wind, solar and tidal energy is dispersed but the technologies for capturing these is possible and practical. These are not as dispersed as the golf stream or hurricanes but not quite as concentrated and usable as oil & gas.

The second problem would occur if we could stick a bunch of generators into the Atlantic. Likely we would slow down the GS and plunge northern Europe into an arctic climate. I don't quite think Europeans would like that.

[Starvid]

Getting power from the Gulf stream is very possible. Off the coast of Florida is ideal as the current is very strong there and also close to land.

http://www.compositesworld.com/ct/issues/2004/April/420

[backstop]

Polina -

on balance, it doesn't seen a likely prospect given the speed of the current where it is fastest near the US coast.
And the average speed across the Atlantic is less than 0.5mph.

Here in the UK we're fitting tidal current turbines off the coast of Cornwall and they're still pretty marginal economically
for all they've more than twice the speed of current you quote
.

But there are two possible changes, one being Govt. support of funding for turbines in less productive sites,
and the other being substantial improvements in low-speed turbine efficiencies.

I do applaud your outlook, that of looking afresh at the potential energy resources around us, rather than, as so often happens,
picking a known option and backing it like a football team !

Welcome to the site.

regards,

Backstop

[dub_scratch]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Starvid', 'G')etting power from the Gulf stream is very possible. Off the coast of Florida is ideal as the current is very strong there and also close to land.

http://www.compositesworld.com/ct/issues/2004/April/420

[Starvid]

I really can't say. I don't know anything about the workings of the Gulf stream except that it carries heat to Europe.

But the forces involved in pushing the Atlantic conveyor are absolutely massive. A few hundred turbines can't make much difference, can they?

I'll wager that the climate changing effect of these turbines are miniscule compared to the equivalent coal plant capacity.

But I am no oceanologist or climatologist, all the above are only guesses and opinions.


And the current is 4 mph off Florida, not 0.5 mph.

[backstop]

Starvid -

I'd tend to agree with you that there seems little prospect of turbines detectably affecting the vast momentum of the Gulf Stream -
no doubt this issue would be heavily scrutinized given the profile the current's critical importance to Europe has gained in the last decade.

BTW the figure of 0.5mph is the average speed across the Atlantic, not beside the US coast.

regards,

Backstop