NASA validates a new form of energy: Alternating Direct Current (ADC)
"AI enabled... AC and DC operate on same existing wires... vintage, wasteful, dangerous energy conversion now obsolete... low voltage, quick EV charging, expanded solar panel generation, and off grid indoor agriculture"
Simon Derricutt commented:
Looks like their main claim is that they can reduce the wiring losses without changing the wiring, and that they remove the need for inverters to switch between DC (24 or 48V) and AC (110V). OK, house wiring has a proof voltage of 500V or so, so if you convert up to 500VDC going into the wires and at every outlet you have a box that converts down again to either DC or AC (depending on what's required) you reduce the wiring losses a lot, with the ratio of wiring losses being the inverse square of the voltage ratio. There will be some loss in the converter, but with modern semiconductors that's only going to be around 4% at each conversion, maybe less. Assuming 3 wires (live, neutral, and earth) you can also send AC along the live, DC along neutral, and the earth is needed for safety reasons, with a simpler voltage conversion on the DC and AC transmissions which would remove the need for conversion between AC and DC, so taking the claims to eliminate inverters this is the more-likely system they're using. Maybe AC between live and neutral, and DC between neutral and earth, which means that the earth wire is always carry a DC current but still works for safety ground because the voltage offset will be low.
What they aren't saying is that if you have DC from the solar panels and need AC you're going to need an inverter somewhere in the system, and if you have AC from the grid and need DC you'll need to do that conversion somewhere, too. However, those needs are things you can't get away from, but you can centralise those in the system somewhere so you don't need them scattered around, and if the connections are low-loss the centralisation works out OK.
I don't have a good idea of the normal wiring losses in factories, but the wire gauge is normally chosen to give acceptable temperature rise so that the insulation doesn't overheat rather than worrying over the voltage drop when loaded. That reduces the amount of Copper needed to do the required job, and people tend to look at the cost-savings on installation rather than the ongoing cost of the lost energy when energy is fairly cheap. If we assume they're using 500V peak (350VAC,RMS) rather than 110VRMS, the heating loss in the wiring reduces to about 7% of what it was before. For 48V converted to 500V, the wiring loss reduces to around 1% of what it was before. A lot of wiring loss to get rid of, if your voltage conversions are efficient. Also means you could send more power down those wires than you could before, so might save rewiring a factory if you find you need increased power.
So yep, this could work. The advertised savings may be achievable, and if the cost of electricity rises further the investment may become more worthwhile. Each outlet will require a converter box to change the wire voltage to what is required for the load, but could run a local lower-voltage net of outlets all the same.
ct commented by email:
Buyer beware. For such an advance one wonders where are Tesla or multiple EE departments comment on the device. It is certainly no secret.
Related:
Weather intelligence and cutting-edge tech is boosting grid capacity by 30%
https://electrek.co/2023/12/07/heimdall-power-meteomatics-grid-capacity-30-percent/
Grid-enhancing technologies can squeeze a lot more power from the existing electric grid
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2322803121
Comments
Post a Comment