I tried to Power my Home with Heat Generators! (Worth it)
video description
Date: 2024-12-02
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
dk6578
I cans see the potential for peltier tiles to generate a decent amount of electricity, but it depends on the application and what needs to be powered. They have been used very successfully to make USB phone chargers, using a fire to heat them and a fan to cool the other side. As for the current home solar solutions, I think they've got something wrong. I am setting up solar on my homemade bike camper, and for one 8 Ah 12v battery I'm using a USB light that only uses around 100 mA. The light running all night doesn't take the battery down one percent. I get heat using hot wire from an electric drying rack, connected to a usb cable. With both I'm using around 500 mA. The battery still doesn't go down one percent running them both all night. I could connect my radio to it, which barely uses anything, and I'd probably be able to run all three for a week before the battery is drained. And just one 24 volt, 50 amp solar panel charges the battery from 20% back up to full in an hour on a cloudy day. I can run 2 controllers and charge 2 batteries and it's still about an hour to charge when cloudy. Solar setups should be separated to separate charge controllers and battery packs, as well as inverters to run specific things. And the inverters shouldn't be on at all times, but only when they're needed, otherwise they're just wasting electricity. If the batteries are completely full in less than a day, more batteries should be added so you're not wasting solar when the batteries are full. it's good to have 2 sets of batteries to switch between them. One set charging and the other discharging. In my current setup, the three things I plan to power off of the one battery, won't end up draining the battery since the battery will be back to full within 20 minutes or less of the sun coming up. A solar setup the size of a golf course should power a small city. A solar setup the size of Germany would power the whole world. A solar setup on a roof, should be more than enough to power everything in the house if it were set up specifically for each appliance or group of appliances. One 12v battery should be able to run your refrigerator 24 hours per day on solar.
reply
I cans see the potential for peltier tiles to generate a decent amount of electricity, but it depends on the application and what needs to be powered. They have been used very successfully to make USB phone chargers, using a fire to heat them and a fan to cool the other side. As for the current home solar solutions, I think they've got something wrong. I am setting up solar on my homemade bike camper, and for one 8 Ah 12v battery I'm using a USB light that only uses around 100 mA. The light running all night doesn't take the battery down one percent. I get heat using hot wire from an electric drying rack, connected to a usb cable. With both I'm using around 500 mA. The battery still doesn't go down one percent running them both all night. I could connect my radio to it, which barely uses anything, and I'd probably be able to run all three for a week before the battery is drained. And just one 24 volt, 50 amp solar panel charges the battery from 20% back up to full in an hour on a cloudy day. I can run 2 controllers and charge 2 batteries and it's still about an hour to charge when cloudy. Solar setups should be separated to separate charge controllers and battery packs, as well as inverters to run specific things. And the inverters shouldn't be on at all times, but only when they're needed, otherwise they're just wasting electricity. If the batteries are completely full in less than a day, more batteries should be added so you're not wasting solar when the batteries are full. it's good to have 2 sets of batteries to switch between them. One set charging and the other discharging. In my current setup, the three things I plan to power off of the one battery, won't end up draining the battery since the battery will be back to full within 20 minutes or less of the sun coming up. A solar setup the size of a golf course should power a small city. A solar setup the size of Germany would power the whole world. A solar setup on a roof, should be more than enough to power everything in the house if it were set up specifically for each appliance or group of appliances. One 12v battery should be able to run your refrigerator 24 hours per day on solar.
reply
greatscott
Thank you for your variety of content -- always amazing.
In this particular case, at time 0: 52, you state that it can directly convert heat into energy -- which is not true. These modules convert a temperature difference into electrical energy. At best, I have seen that there are some materials which exhibit thermoluminescence which you could (in theory) run through PVs to make electricity. This would be a heat -> light -> electricity (I suspect less than 1% efficient) and while not direct the initial source is pure heat. Sure, you could do heat -> steam -> mechanical -> electricity (also from pure heat) -- which is way more efficient even though it goes through more stages. However, it has the other downside of mechanical wearing; but I am sure that the PVs would wear down too.
Next up, I think that it is really difficult to properly quantize a power efficiency as the source is the thermal difference. If I recall, the temperature for the high end might have been reached which is probably what caused the failures. I don't recall if there are any high temperature variants; but if there are, you could stack them such that the high temp ones were closest to the heat source. For testing, you probably want to put a temperature probe between each layer as balancing will probably require some experimentation.
reply
Thank you for your variety of content -- always amazing.
In this particular case, at time 0: 52, you state that it can directly convert heat into energy -- which is not true. These modules convert a temperature difference into electrical energy. At best, I have seen that there are some materials which exhibit thermoluminescence which you could (in theory) run through PVs to make electricity. This would be a heat -> light -> electricity (I suspect less than 1% efficient) and while not direct the initial source is pure heat. Sure, you could do heat -> steam -> mechanical -> electricity (also from pure heat) -- which is way more efficient even though it goes through more stages. However, it has the other downside of mechanical wearing; but I am sure that the PVs would wear down too.
Next up, I think that it is really difficult to properly quantize a power efficiency as the source is the thermal difference. If I recall, the temperature for the high end might have been reached which is probably what caused the failures. I don't recall if there are any high temperature variants; but if there are, you could stack them such that the high temp ones were closest to the heat source. For testing, you probably want to put a temperature probe between each layer as balancing will probably require some experimentation.
reply
tsclly2377
I would use the exhaust pipe of the stove and position the perovskite cells at a point to where the maximum heat would not kill the cells, then use outside air to cool the heat sinks. In the USA most steel fireplace chimneys are now triple pipe; two high temperature steel and a third lower grade galvanized steel that can be cooled, that is for going through attic spaces, so one has the stet-up for passive cooling. So at adequate height with some heat extraction into the house, the exhaust gasses should be cool enough not to destroy the perovskite cells, a steel squared tube could be used that passively used outside air and exhaust up the triple walled chimney. generating some store-able electrical energy, maybe charge a cellphone in an emergency or power led lights. anyway, it should be viewed as alternative energy and only compared to a back up solar or funky generator where the fuel is quite expensive (bottled LPG, canned (tinned) white gasoline (pertol. If you want cheap heat, well try a compost pile and trap the bio-gas and then see that the cost still is really high to produce electrical energy. Scale of economy is why we have electrical lines and big generation electrical stations.
reply
I would use the exhaust pipe of the stove and position the perovskite cells at a point to where the maximum heat would not kill the cells, then use outside air to cool the heat sinks. In the USA most steel fireplace chimneys are now triple pipe; two high temperature steel and a third lower grade galvanized steel that can be cooled, that is for going through attic spaces, so one has the stet-up for passive cooling. So at adequate height with some heat extraction into the house, the exhaust gasses should be cool enough not to destroy the perovskite cells, a steel squared tube could be used that passively used outside air and exhaust up the triple walled chimney. generating some store-able electrical energy, maybe charge a cellphone in an emergency or power led lights. anyway, it should be viewed as alternative energy and only compared to a back up solar or funky generator where the fuel is quite expensive (bottled LPG, canned (tinned) white gasoline (pertol. If you want cheap heat, well try a compost pile and trap the bio-gas and then see that the cost still is really high to produce electrical energy. Scale of economy is why we have electrical lines and big generation electrical stations.
reply
samohraje2433
You've got the wrong ones. Instead of using TEC or more suitable TEC for power generation you need to use TEG instead. They are also more expensive than TECs but atleast they should not be destroyed after running them too hot. TEC is perfect for cooling but terrible at power generation and TEG is perfect for power generation and terrible at cooling. I have one TEG which cost me around 11 including shipping and just one TEG is enough to power a 1W LED. I'm planning to buy atleast 50 of them and use them as back-up source of energy because in my house i'm using as a central heating system a wood/coal 40kW boiler and power outages are pretty common here in Slovakia especially where i live. The boiler was 3x repaired so now it is without an insulation around it exposing bare cast iron. The surface never exceeds 80c. With 50 TEGs i should get around 90-120W nonstop using a large thermal difference ( my plan is to use 10W pump with higher waterflow and one big radiator from air conditioner as a cooling.
reply
You've got the wrong ones. Instead of using TEC or more suitable TEC for power generation you need to use TEG instead. They are also more expensive than TECs but atleast they should not be destroyed after running them too hot. TEC is perfect for cooling but terrible at power generation and TEG is perfect for power generation and terrible at cooling. I have one TEG which cost me around 11 including shipping and just one TEG is enough to power a 1W LED. I'm planning to buy atleast 50 of them and use them as back-up source of energy because in my house i'm using as a central heating system a wood/coal 40kW boiler and power outages are pretty common here in Slovakia especially where i live. The boiler was 3x repaired so now it is without an insulation around it exposing bare cast iron. The surface never exceeds 80c. With 50 TEGs i should get around 90-120W nonstop using a large thermal difference ( my plan is to use 10W pump with higher waterflow and one big radiator from air conditioner as a cooling.
reply
tvalenca
Peltier modules have very low efficiency, no doubts about that! But don't they have to be equally heated to perform the intended way on this experiment since your fireplace surface heats unevenly, causing some modules to fail while others still works fine, this experiment looks to me like when someone grab a bunch of random batteries (some fresh, some depleted) and wire them in series.
I'm not saying that I would do differently because I would probably not, but If I were to try this experiment I would try to create a better heat distribution through every peltier module. And since I need to complicate simple things (haha) I would probably use some coiled tubing to capture heat from the furnace into some liquid and use the heated liquid to heat a water block. (probably this solution will be even more inefficient, but if I were to do this without water on the hot side I would have needed some thick chunks of good heat conductors, not a thin sheet of aluminium)
reply
Peltier modules have very low efficiency, no doubts about that! But don't they have to be equally heated to perform the intended way on this experiment since your fireplace surface heats unevenly, causing some modules to fail while others still works fine, this experiment looks to me like when someone grab a bunch of random batteries (some fresh, some depleted) and wire them in series.
I'm not saying that I would do differently because I would probably not, but If I were to try this experiment I would try to create a better heat distribution through every peltier module. And since I need to complicate simple things (haha) I would probably use some coiled tubing to capture heat from the furnace into some liquid and use the heated liquid to heat a water block. (probably this solution will be even more inefficient, but if I were to do this without water on the hot side I would have needed some thick chunks of good heat conductors, not a thin sheet of aluminium)
reply
ChristieNel
Wow, I had PRECISELY the same idea, down to the water cooling blocks and Victron MPPT. But I did the calculations and decided it probably would be very expensive and not produce much - at least now I can rest knowing someone has confirmed it. On my boat the fire goes continuously throughout the winter and as long as the heat in the coolant is radiated into the boat, the system is 100% efficient, since the energy becomes either heat or electricity. The little Peltier fans we use has a little bimetalic strip underneath that bends and lifts the fan off the hot surface if it gets too hot, which is genius. You definitely need a way to regulate the heat - I had assumed the water cooling would do the job, but apparently not. Another option is to stick them to the chimney, which will be cooler, but chimneys are usually round. I hope you'll revisit this experiment.
reply
Wow, I had PRECISELY the same idea, down to the water cooling blocks and Victron MPPT. But I did the calculations and decided it probably would be very expensive and not produce much - at least now I can rest knowing someone has confirmed it. On my boat the fire goes continuously throughout the winter and as long as the heat in the coolant is radiated into the boat, the system is 100% efficient, since the energy becomes either heat or electricity. The little Peltier fans we use has a little bimetalic strip underneath that bends and lifts the fan off the hot surface if it gets too hot, which is genius. You definitely need a way to regulate the heat - I had assumed the water cooling would do the job, but apparently not. Another option is to stick them to the chimney, which will be cooler, but chimneys are usually round. I hope you'll revisit this experiment.
reply
NigelMarston
I'm so pleased you're doing these experiments because you've stopped me from wasting my own time doing the same. I have a couple of hover board motors I had intended to turn into a VAWT but having seen how poor the output is from your own turbine, I've given up on that idea.
I also have a log burner with a Peltier fan and wondered if i could convert more of the heat energy to electrical but again, the conversion seems remarkably poor.
I already have 21 solar PV panels on my roof which, whenever the sun shines in the UK (insert your own joke here) gives me up to 8KW. I had hoped to supplement that with a VAWT for the other 360 days of the year when the sun doesn't shine.
Perhaps i should move house to one with a fast moving stream nearby.
reply
I'm so pleased you're doing these experiments because you've stopped me from wasting my own time doing the same. I have a couple of hover board motors I had intended to turn into a VAWT but having seen how poor the output is from your own turbine, I've given up on that idea.
I also have a log burner with a Peltier fan and wondered if i could convert more of the heat energy to electrical but again, the conversion seems remarkably poor.
I already have 21 solar PV panels on my roof which, whenever the sun shines in the UK (insert your own joke here) gives me up to 8KW. I had hoped to supplement that with a VAWT for the other 360 days of the year when the sun doesn't shine.
Perhaps i should move house to one with a fast moving stream nearby.
reply
jeremygeorgia4943
I am glad you used a water block. That's what I would have done. I was also thinking, that maybe you could use a block for the hot side & use heated water from the stove, instead of putting the elements directly on the stove. Maybe, you could also find a place in the house that is naturally cooler, so that the bucket remains cooler, too. Finally, if you use enough junctions, maybe there WILL be a point, where it makes sense. That sheet is far from the maximum area available in the house. Peltiers generate more energy, based on the temperature differential. If there was a way to get things even colder, it could work even better. Maybe, you could mount a block to a window, if you'd rather not run the tubing outside.
reply
I am glad you used a water block. That's what I would have done. I was also thinking, that maybe you could use a block for the hot side & use heated water from the stove, instead of putting the elements directly on the stove. Maybe, you could also find a place in the house that is naturally cooler, so that the bucket remains cooler, too. Finally, if you use enough junctions, maybe there WILL be a point, where it makes sense. That sheet is far from the maximum area available in the house. Peltiers generate more energy, based on the temperature differential. If there was a way to get things even colder, it could work even better. Maybe, you could mount a block to a window, if you'd rather not run the tubing outside.
reply
silvano2821
Thank you for the video, it was interesting and gave me many answers. After this and many other video, I think that the green energies are, at least, not mature to be our first source. Others, as nuclear plants must be developed to ensure a continue supply of energy. Also, when we consider all the waste produced for the solar panels, wind turbine etc, we see that they are not so green. Same for extra high isolation for the houses, after a certain thickness it does not make sense to increase the isolation. I could yet continue but I don't want to be repetitive or appear against all the green tech since it's not true, I like them, I think we need a better approach to energy and remember that the best is reduce the use
reply
Thank you for the video, it was interesting and gave me many answers. After this and many other video, I think that the green energies are, at least, not mature to be our first source. Others, as nuclear plants must be developed to ensure a continue supply of energy. Also, when we consider all the waste produced for the solar panels, wind turbine etc, we see that they are not so green. Same for extra high isolation for the houses, after a certain thickness it does not make sense to increase the isolation. I could yet continue but I don't want to be repetitive or appear against all the green tech since it's not true, I like them, I think we need a better approach to energy and remember that the best is reduce the use
reply
jukees3658
You make the projects happen which i dream of doing for years. Excellent. I've thought of doing this for years.
However, quite quickly i've noticed that these basic Peltier modules are horrible for power generation.
There is another type, better one on the market, the TGM-xx-xx modules which seem to make more power and handle increased temperature differences.
With several of those, one could probably actually achieve 100W or so. It will be expensive though.
Could you please consider doing this with TGM-336-1. 4-1. 5 instead
reply
You make the projects happen which i dream of doing for years. Excellent. I've thought of doing this for years.
However, quite quickly i've noticed that these basic Peltier modules are horrible for power generation.
There is another type, better one on the market, the TGM-xx-xx modules which seem to make more power and handle increased temperature differences.
With several of those, one could probably actually achieve 100W or so. It will be expensive though.
Could you please consider doing this with TGM-336-1. 4-1. 5 instead
reply
aware2action
Could have used a convection cooler feeding into an elevated heat exchanger(aka radiator) in closed loop. Also not every peltier can handle higher temps(need a poor thermal conductor interface, if placing directly over wood burning heater surface, due to low temp solder used for the bimetallic junctions. Could easily get enough power for a decent phone charger. They do excel as better heaters than resistive ones, with proper system design. They could also make for better seat heaters in BEVs(esp. to increase range, if not for the cost
reply
Could have used a convection cooler feeding into an elevated heat exchanger(aka radiator) in closed loop. Also not every peltier can handle higher temps(need a poor thermal conductor interface, if placing directly over wood burning heater surface, due to low temp solder used for the bimetallic junctions. Could easily get enough power for a decent phone charger. They do excel as better heaters than resistive ones, with proper system design. They could also make for better seat heaters in BEVs(esp. to increase range, if not for the cost
reply
uwepelz
Hi Scot! Thermoelectrician here: -. I'm affraid your test was doomed from the start. Peltier-Modules are optimized for cooling applications (TECs thermoelectric cooler) - they have a low number of legs with a larger crossection. Modules optimized for energy harvesting (not generation ) have a much larger number of legs with a smaler footprint. These TEG generator modules are much better for harvesting. BUT in the end, the conclusion would have likely be the same.
BTW there are sophisticated MPPTs for TEGs.
Greetings from Freiburg
reply
Hi Scot! Thermoelectrician here: -. I'm affraid your test was doomed from the start. Peltier-Modules are optimized for cooling applications (TECs thermoelectric cooler) - they have a low number of legs with a larger crossection. Modules optimized for energy harvesting (not generation ) have a much larger number of legs with a smaler footprint. These TEG generator modules are much better for harvesting. BUT in the end, the conclusion would have likely be the same.
BTW there are sophisticated MPPTs for TEGs.
Greetings from Freiburg
reply
Robb403
The peltier units for high solar and nuclear pile are made of more substantial materials than the ones you are using and can tolerate much higher heat. Still, they aren't all that efficient and you would probably need a large thermal pile to generate enough power to be useful. The Soviets made a gadget that fit over the chimney of a kerosene lamp that charged a small battery to operate a radio. Maybe you should consider a Stirling generator. NASA designed a Sterling converter for use with solar or nuclear pile that is quite interesting.
reply
The peltier units for high solar and nuclear pile are made of more substantial materials than the ones you are using and can tolerate much higher heat. Still, they aren't all that efficient and you would probably need a large thermal pile to generate enough power to be useful. The Soviets made a gadget that fit over the chimney of a kerosene lamp that charged a small battery to operate a radio. Maybe you should consider a Stirling generator. NASA designed a Sterling converter for use with solar or nuclear pile that is quite interesting.
reply
MiguelDeMarchena
There are TEGs that are more efficient than the Peltier modules and Peltier modules need to have a gradient of temperature that water can not produce for that you were making, Peltier modules are so inefficient that you must invest more energy cooling them than the energy you will get from them and are better for pumping heat but even for this are heavily inefficient. Try getting Bi2Te3 or PbTe or SiGe but beware compared to peltier modules are more efficient but way more expensive and rare.
reply
There are TEGs that are more efficient than the Peltier modules and Peltier modules need to have a gradient of temperature that water can not produce for that you were making, Peltier modules are so inefficient that you must invest more energy cooling them than the energy you will get from them and are better for pumping heat but even for this are heavily inefficient. Try getting Bi2Te3 or PbTe or SiGe but beware compared to peltier modules are more efficient but way more expensive and rare.
reply
fuzzywzhe
I'm not an expert in this area, but I don't believe you want to use a Peltier device for that. You're basically running it backwards. There are thermocouples SPECIFICALLY made for energy generation using a temperature difference although I can tell you right now, it's not worthwhile to use. I think you want to use a thermophotovoltaic device. It's basically a solar cell but it's tuned to infra-red radiation, I think. I believe these are what are used in nuclear batteries.
reply
I'm not an expert in this area, but I don't believe you want to use a Peltier device for that. You're basically running it backwards. There are thermocouples SPECIFICALLY made for energy generation using a temperature difference although I can tell you right now, it's not worthwhile to use. I think you want to use a thermophotovoltaic device. It's basically a solar cell but it's tuned to infra-red radiation, I think. I believe these are what are used in nuclear batteries.
reply
autodoctor6512
I didn't use an intermediate plate. I used the water coolers directly on them and insulated the areas not touching. Gave me a gross out put of 73 watts with only 12 of them. My pump used 0. 4 amps and 12 volts. I would reconsider your design. But water cooled is the best I discovered that passive cooling eliminates the need for a pump on a larger scale. But sure why but I was getting topped out (before breaking) at 5. 01 volts and 1. 233 amps.
reply
I didn't use an intermediate plate. I used the water coolers directly on them and insulated the areas not touching. Gave me a gross out put of 73 watts with only 12 of them. My pump used 0. 4 amps and 12 volts. I would reconsider your design. But water cooled is the best I discovered that passive cooling eliminates the need for a pump on a larger scale. But sure why but I was getting topped out (before breaking) at 5. 01 volts and 1. 233 amps.
reply
DustinWatts
Using fans in the smoke pipe creating some type of turbine would maybe be more feasible. But thanks for testing the Peltier element option for us EDIT: I saw BESTvsWORST-vx2dg already suggested this. Btw, for home use solar power is king. But even better would be nuclear power. But that would not be something everyone has in their backyard. Maybe not yet. Imagine 50 years from now. Everyone having a small nuclear reactor in their garden!
reply
Using fans in the smoke pipe creating some type of turbine would maybe be more feasible. But thanks for testing the Peltier element option for us EDIT: I saw BESTvsWORST-vx2dg already suggested this. Btw, for home use solar power is king. But even better would be nuclear power. But that would not be something everyone has in their backyard. Maybe not yet. Imagine 50 years from now. Everyone having a small nuclear reactor in their garden!
reply
Deja117
I like the idea, but if you use steam power with some water and a turbine, then condense the steam back into water, I feel like it would be a lot more efficient. Heat also rises (hence how it's possible to condense steam again with some clever angles and minimal cooling, you can try getting one of those stove fans made to circulate the heat, and making it into a generator too, although I feel that would yield much the same result.
reply
I like the idea, but if you use steam power with some water and a turbine, then condense the steam back into water, I feel like it would be a lot more efficient. Heat also rises (hence how it's possible to condense steam again with some clever angles and minimal cooling, you can try getting one of those stove fans made to circulate the heat, and making it into a generator too, although I feel that would yield much the same result.
reply
raloed. 363
If you get snow you should make a pipe heat transfer system that flows water outside and gets cold by the snow for the cold side. For the hot side you run water through the heater to get it up. That way you could theoretical have a temperature difference over 100 degrees Celsius while still keeping both sides of the device withing the operating temperature range. So they wont over heat and het destroyed
reply
If you get snow you should make a pipe heat transfer system that flows water outside and gets cold by the snow for the cold side. For the hot side you run water through the heater to get it up. That way you could theoretical have a temperature difference over 100 degrees Celsius while still keeping both sides of the device withing the operating temperature range. So they wont over heat and het destroyed
reply
a. g. 8015
Hi. I Played with TECs and got disappointed, until learned that those aren't really designed for this job. You could get better results with TEG modules. Those are designed for this purpose and can withstand higher temperatures. TEG are more expensive, though. TEG modules are often used for powering offshore lighthouses and space equipment where the heat source usualy is radio isotope.
reply
Hi. I Played with TECs and got disappointed, until learned that those aren't really designed for this job. You could get better results with TEG modules. Those are designed for this purpose and can withstand higher temperatures. TEG are more expensive, though. TEG modules are often used for powering offshore lighthouses and space equipment where the heat source usualy is radio isotope.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
