Genius Bladeless Hydro Turbine is Cheaper Than Solar

This bladeless hydro turbine is an awesome invention that could help increase the energy harnessed from rivers, whilst keeping the local wild life safe. It uses vortexes in a new way to generate power. Enjoy.

Sources:
SETUR webpage:
Published paper on SETUR:

#breakthrough #energy #hydroturbine

[ZirothTech]

Just realised I put some footage of a bigger turbines (that uses the same method of generation) which look pretty deadly and didnt give context - my thought was the smaller/lighter ones would not crush the fish! My bad for not being clear with this!

[blankityblankblank]

I feel the fish will be crushed between the ball and sidewall like a mortar and pestle.

[howardsimpson]

AS an off grid low header, I made many experimental turbines and learned a lot. Efficiency can be up to 70% even with small 100 watt units at 3 feet of head. Self cleaning screens keep fish and debris out. All needs to be stainless steel, dissolved atmospheric CO2 attacks galv and concrete if turbulent. Critical aspect is not having fixed alternator speed, allow the system to self tune to the load. Switchmode electronic control.

[Theblackwidow]

There are many channels on youtube that talk about new scientific concepts but never actually get to the point or setting it into context of real world application. They talk alot but don't say anything useful. First i thought you would be one of them but i am happy to see that you are actually getting to the bottom of those concepts.

[GarthClarkson]

Thanks for the video. Fascinating. As a keen fisherman I can relate to the desire for turbines that don't mince the fish.
That said, looking at the footage you have shown here it looks like any hapless fish that found themselves going through one of these would run the risk of being crushed to paste where the "ball" meets the wall.
Love your work. Cheers.

[billberg]

There are some wind power generation ideas that involve using the wind to “wiggle” a piezoelectric material. You could do the same thing with water. So basically underwater “flags, ” where the undulation of the flexible surface generates electricity. Seems like it would be pretty fish safe.

[orpheuscreativeco]

Safety and affordability are equally important as efficiency. If you can install many small/cheap solutions you have more redundancy and less precision required to generate power, especially nice when something fails. 👍 cool video, thanks for sharing ✌️

[virtone]

In your cup example, the ball never gets too close to the sides of the cup, making it "fish-safe". In the ACTUAL designs, the ball is intended to get very close to the walls, with one example actually narrowing the tunnel at the ball to get it closer. (which probably improves efficiency?) That we would call a "fish-crusher". And with how fast it's revolving around, there's no sneaking around it.

I think, generally speaking, the more "fish-safe" a turbine gets, the less efficient it becomes. Though like you said, if it needs to be safe and isn't, the efficiency is ZERO, totally agree.

[roygreenwood]

The turbulent turbine blades are made from a composite material and are very fish friendly as only small fish can enter the initial run to the turbine, plus only needs a minimum fall in the river, one up and running in Denver in Norfolk uk at the barrier on the great ouse 😊

[unclenick]

I've designed a lot of off-grid solar for both domestic and third-world countries. You aren't accounting for it correctly. A 5 kW turbine running fully loaded 24/7 is producing 120 kWh of energy per day. The solar panels required to gather that much energy, assuming you could count on 4 hours a day of equivalent 1 kW/m² insolation (a 30°-40° latitude annual average-ish value, depending on local weather patterns), would require 30, 000 Wp (watts of panel). If you added batteries to store the energy, depending on the autonomy time (how long you can run on batteries with heavy overcast conditions that kill the sun) appropriate for your local weather patterns, your batteries could easily cost you twice what the panels do. So your turbine capital expense actually looks pretty good.

[Adam_Adamsky]

2:41 The question you SHOULD be asking is the actual true efficiency of such a device compared to other types of turbines.

[covenantor]

Talking about fish friendly, I saw a bladed turbine that was just that, on a science program Towards 2000 or Beyond 2000 (can’t remember which side of 2000 it was).
It was invented by engineering students at a university in Ireland.
The reason it was fish friendly was because the blades were driven by air, not water.
Basically it was a large container that filled with water from a river source (or other).
As the container filled the air expelled drove the blades at the top of the container.
When the container filled to just below the blades it would automatically open a release valve at the bottom. The water exiting would then draw air into the vessel further driving the blades.
To keep the blades turning in the same direction their cross section was such that it looked like a diamond lying horizontally, with the two sides at one end being much shorter than the sides at the other end - hope that makes sense.
The water source would, of necessity, need a drop in levels in line with the top and bottom of the container.

[clinthastings]

Why not just generate the electricity directly using magnets embedded in the walls of the ball and its surrounding housing? That way you could eliminate the need to connect a shaft to the ball, and the need to connect that shaft to a conventional generator.

[karol]

What is unsafe for fish in more traditional turbines are not the blades themselves but the sudden pressure change. Fish have this buoyancy bladder inside - if you put them suddenly in a much higher/lower pressure the bladder gets ripped. Fish-safe turbines aim at extending the distance over which pressure changes.

As other have pointed out - fish would get crushed in this one. Although interesting idea in general!

[ErnestElgin]

Great overview. I question if it is safer than safe bladed designs considering the possibility of crushed by the ball as it approaches the wall of the chamber.

[IslandHermit]

What I like about your channel is that instead of just breathlessly reporting whatever the company's press release says, you look deeper to see if the claims hold up in real-world scenarios. Keep up the good work!

[Will-dg]

I really like your videos because they are very interesting, informative, and you don't just talk about the subject, you go more in depth to show the differences between more options that are out there. Besides, you are informative, easy to listen to, intelligent and you cover intelligent designs that one may not have even thought of. And you throw in The Simpsons at the right time, lol!!! Thank you!!! 🙂

[namele]

putting fins on the bottom of the ball would be, in effect, creating some kind of turbine, so it may negate some of the advantages of a "turbineless" setup

[orenjineko]

I think, to kickstart the vortex, the previous design (snail shape) or inlets like the ones in the vortex fire jet stove are better. And then the axis can be made more static and not wobbling around.

[Lord.Kiltridge]

If a fish can be caught between the ball and the wall of the turbine, it's not really fish safe. A bladed turbine can be safer if it there is no risk of hitting the leading edge of a blade. Hitting the side of a blade is not an issue as long as the blade is not moving too quickly.