Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Aquarium Uses Eel Powered Christmas Lights

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the slippery-tinsel dept.

Power 96

A Japanese aquarium is using the greenest energy possible to power the lights on its Christmas tree, an electric eel. From the article: "Each time the eel moves, two aluminum panels gather enough electricity to light up the 2-meter (6 ft 6 in) tall tree, decked out in white, in glowing intermittent flashes."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Next Step... (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418524)

I want my Eel powered batteries now.

Ask and ye shall receive. (4, Informative)

dtmos (447842) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418766)

Re:Ask and ye shall receive. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34421026)

who is compensating the eel for his efforts in producing electricity? If he is not being compensated aren't we stealing or "pirating"? Maybe fresh water and something to eat is compensation.

Re:Ask and ye shall receive. (1)

Faylone (880739) | more than 3 years ago | (#34422650)

Putting a SALT WATER eel in fresh water isn't exactly a nice thing to do.

Re:Next Step... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34421082)

They make delicious soup, try this recipe. [eelsoup.net]

Re:Next Step... (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421942)

Eel is much better put to use as the principle ingredient in unagi maki :)

Re:Next Step... (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421386)

This isn't about a power source. It's about finally enabling the eels to celebrate the birth of Jesus the way they're supposed to.

Re:Next Step... (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421970)

So, eels get his birth date wrong too?

Re:Next Step... (1)

ksandom (718283) | more than 3 years ago | (#34441184)

To power your Eee

Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34418572)

Some video love: http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoChannel=4&videoId=72584

I hate to say it but (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418642)

Solar is the greenest energy available, hands down. Although I doubt using the sun to provide light would interest many people.

"Wow, an eel-powered christmas tree!"

"You think that's cool, imagine this: A giant ball of hydrogen millions of degrees in temperature constantly undergoing fusion sustains all life on Earth from 93 million miles away! And it will last for billions of years, at almost no cost! Although unfortunately output is subject to seasonal fluctuations."

Re:I hate to say it but (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34418824)

Solar is the greenest energy available, hands down.

Not if the solar cells require a lot of toxic chemicals and energy for the manufacture process...

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419154)

That's only if you want to convert form of the solar energy. As the poster indicated, this is about producing light, and plenty of the solar energy we receive is already in that form and needs no toxic chemicals or energy to convert.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420584)

So, you would hold and release light without conversion how, exactly?

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420812)

Who said anything about hold and release?

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421572)

So, you would hold and release light without conversion how, exactly?

Who said anything about hold and release?

So...you're advocating lights that only work while the sun is shining, is that it?

I think they call that a 'mirror'.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421806)

Mirrors and fibre-optic are exactly what I was thinking of. And of course, the sun is always shining somewhere (although I grant that making use of that fact would involve a significant initial expenditure of energy).

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | more than 3 years ago | (#34422766)

Mirrors and fibre-optic are exactly what I was thinking of. And of course, the sun is always shining somewhere (although I grant that making use of that fact would involve a significant initial expenditure of energy).

Okay, so which would you prefer,

a) a network of unbroken 3,500 mile long fibre optic cables along the surface (1/8 of the circumference of the earth, assuming you'll only need light for half of your nighttime hours and can get it from the east or the west...and you'd need one cable from each direction for morning and evening light, of course), or

b) the (slightly shorter, but much more difficult to manage and maintain) 3,030 mi 'direct' route, by boring directly through the crust, along the 45 degree chord to reach 1/8 of the circumference away from the location of the light (in both directions)?

If you're a night owl, look at doubling those numbers (at least) for each and every location that needs light.

You could run some sort of 'trunk' line with splitters and local distribution, I suppose, but the amount of lumens available after running through cables that long would be pretty much negligible after line losses, and if you need repeaters to 'boost' the light, then there goes the 'all natural' argument...if the masses of fibre optic cables haven't already done that.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419962)

photovoltaic cells are just a bad idea for energy production anyway. Solar thermal generation as a lot fewer issues. We can build daylight solar thermal without any exotic materials, using the same turbines and generators used in other power infrastructure. 24/7 solar thermal requires an added complication of thermal mass, but again that is vastly better than photovoltaics.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Eudial (590661) | more than 3 years ago | (#34426116)

Basic thermodynamics begs to differ. Thermal energy has very high entropy, therefore converting it to electricity (which has low entropy) is never going to be an efficient process.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

ross.w (87751) | more than 3 years ago | (#34427170)

But if you are using abundant solar energy to produce that thermal energy, the efficiency doesn't matter so much.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34436440)

A concentrating collect + steam turbine + generator is still generally more efficient than all but the more exotic photovoltaic cells in terms of area used. And storing a heat mass in a well insulated underground reservoir is a lot more efficient than battery storage or electrolysis for supplying power during night and bad weather.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420774)

Close, but not quite. It really comes down to what offsets what. If throughout the life of the solar panel, does it product enough renewable energy to offset the pollution from creating the solar panel to begin with? If the answer is "yes", then it's not much of an environmental issue... if at all.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#34425300)

Look at your TV, now back to me; Satellites run on solar power. Look out the window; now back to me; Plants run on solar power. Look at yourself, now back to me; We all depend on solar power in some form, solar is the original and greenest power. I ride to work on a horse.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34419170)

Clearly posted by someone who knows nothing of how solar power actually works. It's the greenest energy available, discounting the creating of the cells, their disposal, the incredibly low efficiency, inability to be used in all but select locals, terribly high expense to return ratio... other than that they are the bees knees.

OP also missed the point of the article, which was clearly a cheap advertisement for this particular shop. The article poster turning into a slashvertisment complete with misleading article heading doesn't suddenly make solar power better. Solar power isn't any good, eel power is just worse.

Re:I hate to say it but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34419478)

Consider this: What would happen if you covered the entire world with solar panels and absorbed all the energy from the Sun?

You think climate change is bad now...

Re:I hate to say it but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34420228)

The sun is yellow you dumb ass

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420966)

No, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I'm going to have to go with Broccoli on this one. I don't know how often it is you look at the sun, but I took a gander just this morning, and it wasn't green. It hasn't been green for as long as I've been aware of it.

Now Broccoli on the other hand, is quite green. Its also a source of energy. However, it doesn't really taste the best, I imagine thats why Republicans are so against green power.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34426560)

IIRC, George H. W. Bush liked broccoli. Anecdotal to be sure, but hey, he was the POTUS.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#34428060)

IIRC, George H. W. Bush did not like broccoli. Green to be sure, but draw your own conclusions.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgehw110377.html [brainyquote.com]

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34428136)

Ah, you're right. I knew he had an opinion about broccoli. I just got it bass ackwards.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

KingKaneOfNod (583208) | more than 3 years ago | (#34426976)

Solar is the greenest energy available, hands down. Although I doubt using the sun to provide light would interest many people.

You mean like a skylight? I hear they're quite popular.

Re:I hate to say it but (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#34428240)

Not among people who live in basements.

They questioned the practicality?! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34418648)

Of course, it is not practical. Sometimes practicality needs to be shoved out of the way because impractical is half the fun. In this case it's the idea and the wonder of whether or not it could be done. They've shown it can be done regardless of how practical it may be. I, for one, rejoice in this sort of tinkering and proof.

Re:They questioned the practicality?! (2)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419862)

i don't question the practicality. I admire the fun in it. I do question labeling this as environmentally friendly and green. Resources are consumed keeping that eel alive. The filters are plugged into ac power. food has to be raised and brought to the eel. the eel probably needs the water heated to about 86f. The eel probably needs full spectrum lighting. It's about as environmentally friendly as running your christmas tree off of D cell batteries.

the article is pretty terse. if it's part of a broader display that goes on about how eels themselves generate so much power and wouldn't it be cool if we found a way to mimic the eel and generate clean power from consuming goldfish, well that would be better (unless you are a goldfish).

Of course, according to conventional wisdom, the eel isn't really a good example. It too generates power by consuming biomass and oxygen and emits carbon dioxide.

Re:They questioned the practicality?! (1)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419920)

i forgot some other byproducts of eel generated power. Methane, Amonia. Some yucky sludge.

Re:They questioned the practicality?! (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420352)

What math needs to be done is if the current being used for the tree is normally "waste" current.

the eel is going to discharge the current anyway so if this is not being "used" then using it for a tree does no harm to said eel.

anybody have the math on how much current on average that type of eel produces??

Re:They questioned the practicality?! (1)

xyra132 (615021) | more than 3 years ago | (#34442326)

iirc the most recorded for an electric eel was about 600volts and a bit over 1 amp. Wikipedia claims 500v, 1amp produced through a series of cells each producing 0.15v. Of course this discharge is pretty short, each pulse being incredibly quick. Not sure on electric eels, but electric catfish can only discharge once every hour or so as it takes time for them to charge up again.

Re:They questioned the practicality?! (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#34423342)

I suspect the claims of green may be a bit tongue in cheek.

My hovercraft is full of eels... (1)

ichthyoboy (1167379) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418714)

Can these electric eels power it too?

Re:My hovercraft is full of eels... (1)

boristdog (133725) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419144)

Not only does your user name really fit this thread, but an electric eel powered hovercraft has to be one of the top 3 coolest things I've heard of this week.

Re:My hovercraft is full of eels... (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421058)

Can these electric eels power it too?

Only if they are shrieking eels* - then you can be really eco friendly by getting two memes for the price of one.

(*as referenced in that nice respectable fantasy movie we all love. Not the top hit on Google at the moment which is distinctly NSFW. Ick!)

What about the eel? (1)

FriendlyPrimate (461389) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418776)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't they "draining power" from the eel through induction, not unlike the way you can steel power from high-voltage power lines? That power has to come from somewhere. Does the eel have to speed up it's metabolism to compensate?

Re:What about the eel? (1)

Oo.et.oO (6530) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418920)

my question exactly. eating more and creating more "greenhouse gas".

the other one is "Each time the eel moves, two aluminum panels gather enough electricity to light up..." each time it moves? at all? blinks? (dunno if eels blink)

Re:What about the eel? (2)

operagost (62405) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418942)

Isn't it about time we addressed the issue of eel farts?

Re:What about the eel? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418980)

I think the eel would find that the water between the plates is "thicker" or "closer" or however it interprets more resistance. The eel doesn't have to speed up its metabolism, but it will tire out sooner. It simply won't swim as far/long as it did before.

Re:What about the eel? (1)

AxemRed (755470) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419776)

I'm not sure if the eel has to speed up its metabolism, but it does have to maintain it which takes food. When you consider the resources spent in taking care of the eel and farming/catching its food, I'm not sure if eel-power really turns out to be greener in the end. But it's amusing anyway.

Re:What about the eel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34422042)

And do they link the eel's brain up to a virtual reality simulation of the late 20th century so that it doesn't realize it's actually trapped in an aquarium powering xmas lights and try to fight back with kung fu?

Terrible (1)

torgis (840592) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418870)

This is a shocking abuse of power by these researchers. We demand that it cease immediately.

Regards,
PETA

Feedback (3, Interesting)

dtmos (447842) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418932)

... so if the eel is in sight of the tree, and is photophobic (or -philic), can one set up an oscillation in which eel movement causes light which causes more movement, making the tree lights flash at a substantially constant rate?

No-eel (5, Funny)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34418968)

No-eel, No-eel, No-eel, Noooo-eeeeeel!

Born is the light powered by my eel.

Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34419062)

3 year old video of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9wktSQdyaE

Re:Video (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 3 years ago | (#34422082)

The journalist claims the energy production is entirely energy free.

Don't eels poop?

Re:Video (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 3 years ago | (#34422360)

er, pollution free. Duh.

Deja vu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34419094)

They are doing the same thing at an aquarium here in Finland. The linked article is only in Finnish but there you have it: http://www.mtv3.fi/kampanja/helmi/vapaalla/lemmikit/minun_lemmikkini/1221843.html

PETA (1)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419558)

I'm sure PETA is going to have a cow. You know they're not just about EATING animals. Ethical Treatment and all!!! Is it ETHICAL to STEAL energy from an eel without asking it first?!

Hell, they're not happy you even HAVE an eel. Much less are forcing it to move around so you can harvest it's energy.

I can see a bunch of naked protesters between aluminum panels trying to power lightbulbs now.

Re:PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34419784)

I can see a bunch of naked protesters between aluminum panels trying to power lightbulbs now.

I saw a movie that started like this.

Re:PETA (1)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419964)

I don't like it myself. And everybody on Slashdot will slam me for caring about the treatment of an eel... right up until the day they figure out how to harvest energy from humans like in the Matrix and then you're the eel.

Re:PETA (1)

Lurker2288 (995635) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420146)

You're an idiot. 1) Please explain to me the ethical implications of using the electricity generated by eels already living in captivity, as opposed to simply keeping them captive. 2) This is a gimmick. It is not a practical source of power, the same way that wiring up humans is not a practical source of power, because the processing of food into heat and electricity by the human body necessarily introduces significant energy loss. You'd be better off just burning the food. Please try again when you understand thermodynamics, kthnxbye.

Re:PETA (1)

ChefInnocent (667809) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420076)

If we could draw power from PETA ("ethical treatment") members, I'm all for it. If it is the "eating tasty animals" people, then of course they are going to have a cow. Beef, it's what's for dinner, but eel is pretty tasty too. You won't see them protesting this event though.

Re:PETA (2)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420744)

You can draw power from PETA members. All you need is a giant treadmill or hamster wheel, a PETA member on the wheel, and a very hungry rottweiler on a chain behind them.

Re:PETA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34420162)

RTFA - The eels have been fully compensated for their power delivery services.

Re:PETA (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421008)

I'm sure PETA is going to have a cow.

I doubt it - maybe they'll have some tofu or a nice stuffed pepper.

Re:PETA (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421596)

How many PETA members does it take to change a lightbulb?


Doesn't matter, PETA can't change a damned thing.

Re:PETA (1)

SleazyRidr (1563649) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421840)

I can see a bunch of naked protesters between aluminum panels trying to power lightbulbs now.

That. Would. Be. AWESOME!

Re:PETA (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34426578)

That's nothing: come New Year's Day, the Japanese will probably eat the eel.

Re:PETA (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#34428102)

I can see a bunch of naked protesters between aluminum panels trying to power lightbulbs now.

When we tried that, the bulbs did not light, but was that the protest?

Cool but not novel (1)

starfishsystems (834319) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419592)

I think I remember seeing this done at the Vancouver Aquarium about forty years ago. They used small neon lamps, which could be coupled directly to the tank voltage without burning out. It was an elegant approach, requiring few components. Neon lamps work equally well with AC or DC. The eel isn't being stimulated to discharge lethal amounts of electricity, but even small muscle movements will occasionally produce enough voltage to make the lamps flicker.

I've wondered how well LED lamps could be adapted for this purpose. It's too bad that the article is so short on details. LEDs operate at around 2 or 3 volts. You could arrange a hundred of them in series, I suppose. Also, unlike 40 years ago, voltage regulators are widely available as inexpensive ICs. If you powered them from the eel, they could in turn drive the LEDs. There is then no requirement to divide a high voltage among a large number of LEDs. A few would do just as well. With capacitors for current storage, it might even be possible to run the LEDs continuously.

But what powers the eel? (2)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419702)

I've had exotic fish (and reptiles, etc). They all require specific environments maintained at the right temperature. The water requires filtration. Often they require special lighting. You have to feed them. None of that stuff comes for free. I don't think you can make a closed energy loop out of an eel.

Re:But what powers the eel? (1)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420054)

Exactly. Considering how much energy is used to support the eel, its conversion efficiency is likely very, very low.

Re:But what powers the eel? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420888)

The point you guys are missing is that its an aquarium - its powering the eel regardless if the eel is powering the lights or not.

So...

Why not?

Re:But what powers the eel? (1)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421042)

Haha, you're right. If the eel is "wasting" energy then I guess they can harvest some of it. But it's not really applicable beyond the aquarium setting.

Free battery: two eels in 1 tank, barriered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34425222)

What if you have an aquarium with two eels, then you insert a pane of circus glass between them so they alway see the other as being bigger or smaller or opposite gender as whoever looks through the glass. Now, how about we harness the energy of inequality between the two? It'll be like an organic car battery, or how IRS strawmans the people into becoming "taxpayers", or what religion does to destroy the relation between man and woman! All we'll get is some Split-Positive free energy, we need to try it!

Re:But what powers the eel? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34424932)

I don't think you can make a closed energy loop out of an eel.

This Crazy Glue says you are wrong.

Re:But what powers the eel? (1)

ksandom (718283) | more than 3 years ago | (#34441232)

I was also wondering what state the eel is in. Like how much ability it has to move? If at all? The article doesn't seem to say. Athough it sounds like the electrodes are directly in contact with the eel, so I imagine they must be transmitting the power directly via a cable to the tree..? That mustn't be fun for the eel. I wonder what it feels like. If the electricity is being disipated in a way it's not meant to, it could be quite uncomfortable. Having said that, maybe eels spend their life in pain, and this is a relief. (that's not totally serious, but not completely joking either)

Eels are lazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34419738)

The problem is getting the eel to move.

green. NOT. (1)

jdanilso (128963) | more than 3 years ago | (#34419746)

Put the eel back in the river or ocean. Shut down the aquarium. Turn off the lights. That would be green. This isn't.

Re:green. NOT. (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420916)

Turn off the internet while they're at it.

Re:green. NOT. (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421626)

atleast HIS internet

Re:green. NOT. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34422540)

Yes... the ULTIMATE way to teach children, especially those that live in a city like Tokyo, a proper appreciation of nature is to hide it away from them so they cannot see it. Close the zoos, the aquariums, and anything else that might actually use energy and resources in their quest to preserve and display animals and environments that 95% of us will never be able to witness in the wild. If those spoiled little brats want to observe a little bit of nature while in their high-tech urban environment, they can read a book or something.

Oh, wait, no books either... that uses trees. Snot-nosed punks don't need to see animals anyway!

And make sure should you ever choose to release an animal from an aquarium into the wild, you do it in waters they're not native to so they can properly destroy the ecosystem like the Northern Snakeheads and Asian Carp are doing in American rivers.

Re:green. NOT. (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34426600)

Go sit in the dark and stop eating. Die. Wait for the maggots to consume your body. That would be greener still.

My pet eel won't do it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34420154)

My pet eel won't do this. He objects because he's Jewish.

Other Uses (1)

VorpalRodent (964940) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420176)

Let me know when they achieve an output sufficient to power something larger, like a hovercraft. I would certainly make use of it there.

Re:Other Uses (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420372)

It has already been done. Hence, my hovercraft is full of eels.

Ah yes (1)

zounds011 (1935706) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420236)

My aquarium is full of eels!

2007 is calling (1)

Rashdot (845549) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420288)

Of course there was no video available in TFA, so I went and searched for it.

Here's a 2007 version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9wktSQdyaE [youtube.com]

Metroid? (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420658)

If they cross genetics from a eel to a jellyfish, you've got a water-bound Metroid. Leave it up to the Japanese to pull this one off.

Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34420974)

How much power does it take to keep an eel alive in a tank 24/7 so that visitors can see some lights flicker a few hours a day?

And if the notoriety attracts more visitors, don't they just end up causing more resources to be used in the building?

I bet this thing has a carbon footprint like a Hummer.

Re:Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#34421642)

maybe we could harness the power of the point, sailing WAY over your head

Re:Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34422408)

Putting a piezoelectric footpad under the visitors would generate a lot more energy output with a lot less carbon output.

(If you ever think I'm missing the point, you're missing the big picture. I'm talking fucking Guernica, here.)

Re:Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#34434124)

the exhzibit is about raising awareness, to encourage outside-the-box thinking with regards to alternative energy.. not about powering the world with captive eels.

Re:Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34435344)

That's fine, but it's not the "greenest energy possible", in fact, it's nasty energy camouflaged as green just because it comes from a living thing.

Now, if they ran the wires to the stream where the eel normally lives, that would be green.

Re:Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

Combatso (1793216) | more than 3 years ago | (#34436030)

headlines and press pandering aside... its meant to be a muse, not an idea..

I have doubts that damming streams is good for the environment.. it dries up wetlands, and wets drylands..

I get your line of thinking, I think we just seen a different purpose in this exhibit.

Re:Greenest Energy Possible? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#34436676)

I see the purpose in the exhibit. I just don't see a purpose in characterizing it as the greenest energy possible when it's nearly the opposite.

Hello eel... follow the white rabbit... (1)

BlackBloq (702158) | more than 3 years ago | (#34427108)

My name is Morpheus, I hold in my hands a Red pill and a blue pill.....
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?