Ron

I rightly said it that wind is yet little neglected. But now a days i see few corporations which are harvesting wind power. Some corporation claim that if we go at higher altitudes of say 1000 feet or so, wind energy is sufficient to power more than our needs. I will send the references tomorrow.

But I would like to raise few questions here about various energy sources:

1. Wind: Wind is blowing. But if we extract some energy from the flow, the energy content it the flow will reduce. Will that affect the earth environment? The wind will not reach to a point where it will reach otherwise, and then some problems related to this phenomenon? (if so many wind mills are there). Presently no such proble is there, as number of wind mills is also small.

2. Using water energy (hydropower) is really harmless, if we do not change its natural course of flow. We will be extracting potential energy in the water which otherwise also will get converted in some other (may be heat) form of energy. But, if we change the course of flow for extracting the energy, that will affect both regions: region where the water would have gone otherwise and the region where we are draing water after extracting potential energy. Here near to my place, there is a big dam constructed on River Koyana. This river flows from western edge of the country to eastern sea. But for taking advantage of deep valleys on west of the dam and to extract the poetential energy, complete water is drained to west and in western see. This has drastically reduced the water availability on eastern part of the country(1500 kms stretch). On the other hand the area on which water is drained is just less than 100 Kms wide. Thus the drained water is not really utilized fully and goes to sea.

3. Solar: no side effects as we will be extracting it from same area on which it is falling.

4. Geothermal: We will be extracting it from down the earth. I know, what we will be extracting is very minimal portion of what is available. But if we extract at too many places, what will be overall effect on earth .... water table, rotation and I can not imagine in which many ways it may affect earth.

5. Tidal: There should not be any effect on nature as we are extracting just be locking the tidal energy temporariily and at very minimal area as compared to very large coast available.

GA. We might add on that these sources of energy are also limited geographically. For example, wind energy can only be harvested where the wind is strong enough. Likewise, while hydroelectricity can be harnessed anywhere there is a large enough body of water, nonetheless, it will only have minimal environmental impact if the water turbine is located next to a fast flowing river; as constructing a hydroelectric dam will cause permanent alteration to the environment.

GA from me.

Yes, I agree with you. Thanks for pointing out what I missed.

"2. Using water energy (hydropower) is really harmless, if we do not change its natural course of flow. We will be extracting potential energy in the water which otherwise also will get converted in some other (may be heat) form of energy. But, if we change the course of flow for extracting the energy, that will affect both regions: region where the water would have gone otherwise and the region where we are draing water after extracting potential energy."

Hydropower is in no way harmless. You are missing the damage to ecosystems that hydropower creates, not to mention recreational purposes. In the U.S., the Colorado River no longer reaches the ocean because it is used by towns, farmers and cities in the neighboring states. In many other dammed rivers, we are installing fish by-passes to restore the ecosystems.

I stick with my original statement. Hydropower is harmless if we do not change its natural course. Here hydropower is extracting electricity from the potential energy of the water.

The damages you say are not hydropower related. ... Recreation, use by towns, farmers and cities is not hydropower, in which sense I use the word.

In fact, dam managers should maintain the river flow during whole year, as it would flow in absence of the dam (except during rainy season, wher high floods are there. During high rains, avoid floods by storing the water and then afterwards drain the water as it would be as per season, if no dam is there. This may maintain the ecosystem as natural.

My point is that dams change the natural course of the ecosystem. Dams block the water from moving down the river. During low flow or drought years, the dams store more water reducing the flow of the river. The flooded area of the dam has changed from a flowing river to a man made lake. The native species that once thrived in this area usually die off and new species are usually introduced. The fish and animals can no longer migrate to their wintering or breeding grounds. I have been below a hydropower dam (Bagnel Dam in Missouri) when it was running. There were pieces of fish all through the water. The ecosystem that was there prior to the dam was disrupted by the dam. In the U.S., many dams are being removed after the silt is dug out to restore the ecosystem.

WWkayarker-

Here in Panama, people are beginning to realize how damaging conventional hydro really is. A study of four proposed hydro plants in Panama demonstrated that it takes on the average about 5 hectares of land to generate 1 megawatt of electricity with hydro. This is destroyed rainforest in this part of the world. Furthermore, I have seen, based on measurements of the recharge rate of a series of wells, that even a small hydro installation can seriously alter the subterranean aquifers downstream, increasing the difficulty of providing potable water to a population already water-challenged due to contaminated surface waters...

This link provide a great overview of what environmental impacts hydropower has.

http://www.fwee.org/hpar.html

Gsuhas has a different perspective.

India has been much more densely populated, for much longer than the americas...

Monsoons increase the importance of flood control.

Hi...

It isn't correct to say that mankind did not give much emphasis to wind energy. In-fact, wind was the earliest forms of energy to be tapped by humans especially for transportation. Columbus discovered America on a wind powered sailing ship. So were the old Indian & Chinese traders who wandered all over the East Indies.

It is only that we have now reached some sort of a limit. I've installed a lot of wind turbines. Although these wind turbines generate clean power nobody seems to have analysed how much energy from fossil fuels was used up in manufacturing, transporting & installing these machines. Many of these turbines are of MW sizes and huge monsters. May be in certain cases we could have spent more energy in manufacturing & putting up these machines than what they'll produce in their entire life span.

Despite popular myth, Columbus did not discover America. There was already a large, complex culture thriving in the Americas well before he got lost. As for white man, the Vikings were in N.America 500 years earlier. There is also a good argument that the Egyptians were in N.America as well.

I think the OP said that wind was one of the keystone energys tapped by early 'civilization'.

I think that lots of small-scale hydro has a future as a viable energy source. Tapping smallish streams and positing the water back into the larger drainage system without disrupting the whole system with massive dams is a viable option. As far as I know, current turbine designs are only 50% efficient. This, of course, is area specific.

There are some misconceptions about the history of the use of a variety of various power sources. Here is a bit of a summary I put together (the research was limited to information available on the Internet). The point I would like to make is that if the ancient sources of energy (solar, wind, etc) had been adequate, why are humans so anxious to tap in to every new source that comes along?

Humanity has developed significant capabilities in the exploitation of suplimental energy sources over the ages, with a single motive. External energy leverages the amount of work of which a person is capable. For instance, sometime around the end of the 18th Century, it took nearly half the population of the United States to grow sufficient food to feed the nation. Today, it takes less than 4% of the population to grow signficantly more food than is required to feed a much larger population.
If, as many experts suggest, modern humans date from approximately 200,000 years ago, then it can be said that humanity has relied on what are today considered "alternative energy sources" for more than 99.9% of our existance. The archeological record suggests that humans first domesticated animals something like 14,000 years ago, but whether dogs, the first animals known to have domesticated humans were originally utilized as beasts of burden at that time is not known. There is evidence that horse domestication dates to something like 9000 years ago, although it is not clear when such animals were first used to drive milling wheels and water lifts. However, domesticated animals are nothing more than bioreactors for converting solar-based fuels into alternative energy forms; we are still dealing with primarily solar energy sources. There is archeological evidence that humans availed themselves of geothermal energy sources for such things as heating and bathing for at least 10,000 years, but this use was restricted to localized sources and limited domestic applications (heating, bathing, medicinal) applications until some time in the mid-1800's in Italy, when it is believed the first industrial use of geothermal energy was initiated (the first recorded geothermal energy plant dates from 1904 in Italy as well).
There are archeological records suggesting that the use of wind energy for vessel propulsion dates to something prior to 3500 years ago (generally as early as 5500 years ago), as recorded in an image on an Egyptian vase dating from that time; prior to the mastering of wind energy, the single, sole source of energy available to humanity was solar. Whether captured in the food we ate, or through the use of domesticated animals as beasts of burden, or the firewood we burned, virtually alll energy used by humanity up until the advent of sailing was purely solar in origin. Using wind to enhance iron smelting has been dated to about 300 BC, and the Persions were using wind-powered engines by about 200 BC. Again, from Wikipedia, "However, the first practical windmills were built in Sistan, Afghanistan, from the 7th century. These were vertical axle windmills, ... used to grind corn and draw up water, and were used in the gristmilling and sugarcane industries." Wind energy developed as a primary energy source, with the dispersion of the famous Holland windmills dotting the countryside and Don Quiote tilting at them in symbolic resistance to industrialization. Even into the middle of the 20th century the Great Plains of North America were dotted with windmills used for pumping water where other sources of energy were not readily available.
Actually, even wind energy is a form of solar energy, in that winds originate in the differential heating from the sun of different areas of the earth's surface. So we have to look closer to the present to find any serious diversion from our primary solar source. Hydro power was probably the first "non-solar" energy source to gain wide spread use, and by about 100 BC we have recorded evidence of water wheels being used to mill grain into flour. As technology expanded, water wheels have been a traditional source of concentrated energy for saw mills and manufacturing and textile factories, paving the way for the industrial revolution that was awaiting the full-scale exploitation of fossil fuels.
The advent of the use of coal as a heating source can be dated to some time before the 2nd Century AD in Roman Britannia, and by the Aztecs in Mesoamerica. By 1306, the environmental concerns over the use of coal as a primary heating source were sufficient for Edward I to temporarily ban coal fires in London (Note: this significantly predates the Industrial Revolution). However, it wasn't until some time in the 18th century, with the advent of the steam engine, that the use of coal really took off. The reason (according to Wikipedia): "Coal was cheaper and much more efficient than wood fuel in most steam engines." The first known steam engine actually dates from around the first century AD, credited to Hero of Alexandria, but it was little more than a novelty until 1712 when Thomas Newcomen started pumping water from mines and delivering water to factories sited far from other sources of hydro power. Thanks to Johann Gutenberg's 1455 introduction of movable type, we have extensive records of the public outcry over the safety issues of this new technology, a phenomenon that seems to accompany any introduction of new technology. In 1736, Jonathan Hulls
took out a patent in England for a Newcomen engine-powered steamboat, and by 1794, John Fitch had successfully mounted a steam engine to a railroad locamotive.
With regards to petroeum use, we again turn to Wikipedia: "Petroleum, in one form or another, is not a recent discovery. More than four thousand years ago, according to Herodotus and confirmed by Diodorus Siculus, asphalt was employed in the construction of the walls and towers of Babylon; ... Ancient Persian tablets indicate the medicinal and lighting uses of petroleum in the upper levels of their society ... The earliest known oil wells were drilled in China in 347 CE or earlier... The oil was burned to evaporate brine and produce salt. By the 10th century, extensive bamboo pipelines connected oil wells with salt springs. The ancient records of China and Japan are said to contain many allusions to the use of natural gas for lighting and heating ... The modern history of petroleum began in 1846 with the discovery of the process of refining kerosene from coal by Nova Scotian Abraham Pineo Gesner ... Even until the mid-1950s, coal was still the world's foremost fuel, but oil quickly took over."
But it is the advent of the modern electrical industry that heralded the remarkable transformation of our society. As ubiquitous as electrical energy is to our society, it is difficult to maintain a historical perspective on its development. While humans have been aware of electrical effects for most of recorded history, the first evidence of the use of electricity comes from what appears to have been a battery, possibly used for electroplating objects, dating from some time between 300 BC and 300 AD, originally found in Khujut Rabua in Mesopotamia. It wasn't until about 1800 that Alessandro Volta created his famous battery. The first electrical power generating station started operation in September of 1882 in New York, with George Westinghouse following in 1895 with his Niagra Falls power plant, using, obviously, hydro power. Again, there was significant public concern over this new technology. In 1920, only about 2% of the energy consumed in the United States was dedicated to the production of energy; today, it is upwards of 40%.
Interestingly, it would appear that one of the first applications to which Mr. Volta's battery (and subsequent improvements) was applied was transportation. Again, wikipedia: "The electric car was among the oldest automobiles - small electric vehicles predate the Otto cycle upon which Diesel (diesel engine) and Benz (gasoline engine) based the automobile. Between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), Scottish businessman Robert Anderson invented the first crude electric carriage... Many innovations followed and interest in motor vehicles increased greatly in the late 1890s and early 1900s. In 1897, the first commercial application was established as a fleet of New York City taxis built by the Electric Carriage and Wagon Company of Philadelphia. ...The years 1899 and 1900 were the high point of electric cars in America, as they outsold all other types of cars...The electric vehicle was the preferred choice of many because it did not require the manual effort to start, as with the hand crank on gasoline vehicles, and there was no wrestling with a gear shifter. While basic electric cars cost under $1,000, most early electric vehicles were ornate, massive carriages designed for the upper class. They had fancy interiors, with expensive materials, and averaged $3,000 by 1910. Electric vehicles enjoyed success into the 1920s with production peaking in 1912." Were it not for Henry Ford's contributions to mass production and the introduction of Texas Crude resulting in cheap gasoline, we would likely still be driving electric cars (and bemoaning the limited range available from a single charge).

I thank you for taking the time and effort to put together this interesting and informative narrative.

Hydro power was probably the first "non-solar" energy source to gain wide spread use, and by about 100 BC we have recorded evidence of water wheels being used to mill grain into flour.

Sorry to be pedantic but the water was lifted by solar energy to a higher level and then flowed down to be lifted back by solar. Coal, oil etc all solar as the original organic matter would have been created by solar power. Therefore horses are no more solar powered, or no less, than a ferrari. What is relevant today is the increase in carbon in the atmosphere from using fossil fuels. Ponies and horses do not need fossil fuels. That is the benefit over many systems, and they can generate their own power on site, or haul the power supply themselves.

The energy extracted in a hydro system is a direct extraction of gravitational forces, not the extraction of the solar energy that evaporated the water.

solar energy lifts the water to a higher gravitiational potential, that is what you are harvesting.

Simon

After all different sources of energy are tapped around the world, depending their availability.

But it is the ease of storage and handling which forced us to use oil based fuels for transportation.

The same storage problem is also present in electricity generation: you can't store the harvested energy sufficiently to produce electricity on demand. So the solution to generate a base power with nuclear and variable power with fossil fuels is not so stupid as it is pictured.

The knowledge to harvest sustainable energy is readily available, the technology to store the energy is still missing.

In the future the power grid will have to be very sophisticated to handle the continuous changing power flows: the sun comes up and all PV systems start to generate, driving the energy to the storage facility, a cloud comes over: the direction changes and the storage facility has to produce energy within some milliseconds.

For transportation: as soon as fossil oil becomes so rare that is can only be used for the specific applications where we have no alternative (eg aviation) we will have to live with reduced mileage of land transportation. The train and waterway's will become very important for our daily supplies. In a reaction production will move back to the consumers (this is already happening).

So the energy question of the future is: how will we store what we can harvest.

The knowledge to harvest sustainable energy is readily available, the technology to store the energy is still missing.

(I've copied my entry from the thread Looking for a Problem.)

Most of the electricity consumed in the US is for either heating or cooling so why does everyone use windmills to generate electricity?

How about using a wind turbine (preferably a VAWT) to directly drive a compressor. You can then simultaneously heat and cool two large insulated tanks of water. Use the cool tank via a heat exchanger for air conditioning (cooling) when needed; use the hot tank via a heat exchanger for hot water and heating when needed.

You'd need to design, a flexible robust and maintenance friendly compressor.

By the way: water has the highest specific heat capacity of any known substance. But, you could reduce the size of the "storage" tanks by utilising state change materials. (In fact if you used salt water in the cool tank the state change material could be water/ice in sealed flexible containers.)

I guess that compressors used as heat pumps work best when the two reservoirs have lower heat differentials so it would probably help to allow the hot reservoir to cool towards ambient during hot weather, and, the cold reservoir to warm towards ambient during cold weather (when possible).

Now you already offer a solution: energy storage in the form of heat/cold.

It is a very good solution and the latent heat storage system has potential.

But heat storage requires space, not alway's available.

It costs a lot of money.

Wind is also not everywhere alway's present and in regions where it becomes hot it usually does not blow that hard.

But why not giving the grid some intelligence that these chillers/heaters operate when sufficient electricity is generated? Such a system has been installed in france and Belgium (the most nuclearised countries in the world) to cope with the overproduction by the nuclear power plants.

Going deeper in this way of working and enabling the power/grid operating company to switch on specific units and giving them information on the state of the storage would enable them to fill everyones storage over the day and keep the grid alive with all the fluctuations there are. (heaters can be solid state switched, enabling to react in milliseconds on changes)

But a good start would be to prohibit grid coupled new residential chillers: they have to work from their own windmill/PV panels/.....

Over time all residential chillers and heating devices will have to be swapped to storage systems with alternative supply.

I have a feeling that 80% of the western houses could harvest the heat needed for winter heating in the summer (with the use of solar collectors on the roof) but someone has to set up demonstration projects in regions where it is already disputable (above 50° latitude so that no-one in the US can claim they live to much to the north, except Alaska)

I could heat my house with a 60m³ storage tank heated to 80°C in summer and cooled to 30°C over winter. But buying and installing an insulated 60m³ tank costs way more than several years of natural gas burning, more years than a decent life expectancy of the tank-insulation system, so I keep on burning fossil fuels.

Imagine I would reduce the tank, work with latent heat storage (Parrafin) and add a small windmill to generate heat/power over the whole year. It would become more interesting but still to expensive.

But technology is evolving.

Along with the question of storage another looms its its head. That is the cost to produce the energy and store it for delivery. Until wind power and solar power can produce electricity (without major subsidies) at a cost competitive with carbon based fuels or nuclear power, investors will not provide the capital necessary to build the facilities. The governmental involvement (and spending of our tax dollars) to support alternative energies is the only thing proping up these schemes. When they are truly viable, it is unlikely anyone could stop the investors from building facilities. I just hate to think of all the wasted taxpayer money; maybe congress should worry about that too.

There is a lot of money invested by the taxpayer into Nuclear and fossil fuel systems.

The first just can't survive without the big governmental backup and the second is costing a lot due the health impact burning fossil fuels have.

But with the first oil fields being exhausted the price of fossil fuels will continue to rise. The quality of the new fields is also a lot lower than the exhausted fields, processing costs will also rise.

Economic models to compare the two way's are also different: when traditional power plants are build the payback period is set at 20 to 40 years, alternative systems are cancelled as they can't guarantee a payback in 5 to 10 years.

But the biggest problem remains that alternative systems mostly deliver power when they want and not when we need it.

I am working with a simple renewable energy system, highly mobile, with a days energy stored onboard and free overnight refuelling. Voice activated control system, and capable of intelligent response to external environmental signals. It is called a pony and I am currently replacing a tractor and two men with a pony, Obama, and myself.

Clean, green and simple.

Simon

We also have may more renewable systems already in use: Donkey, Bullock, horse etc.

I am not kidding. These are the real useful systems.

Dead right, so why is everyone looking at wind power and solar power and water power and tidal power and ignoring horsepower and animal power, in the west at any rate. Anyone interested in getting a discussion of the possibilities of using animal power, which built most of the world's civilisations, to help get us out of the mess we are in, lets start discussing the possibilities for the future, rather than trying to return to the past. When I build vehicles or harness i always check the calendar to see which millennium we are in and then use techniques, materials and attitudes to health and safety and animal welfare, appropriate to the millennium I am working in.

Simon

GA plus relative emissions of greenhouse gasses.

I believe that Kangaroos are much better in this regard, but, I suspect that filtering the output power may be a problem.

Why would pony power be any different than ethanol from corn?

Pony can be fueled by virtually every type of organic material. I am not sure if ethanol can be extracted from any type of organic.

Besides, Organic material to pony is single stge conversion to energy.

But corn to ethanol to vehical is two stage conversion. I am not sure, which if effectively more efficient. Besides, ethanol based vehicals need a reasonably smooth road. POny doesn'nt need any. In that sense is vehical can not compete with pony!

Organic material — Pony — methane — Vehicle

Organic material — Pony — methane — Vehicle

It is double benefit:

Organic material — Pony — methane — Vehicle + Organic material — Pony — Vehicle

What processes are used to produce ethanol from corn and convert the ethanol to forward propulsion. My pony ambles along swiping mouthfuls of grass from the verge pulling me (100kg) and 130kg of camping gear. He eats, digests and moves all at the same time with no ancillary equipment. The exhaust byproducts makes his fuel grow better.

Now tell me how you travel while converting corn to ethanol, and ethanol to energy.

Simon

It is known that the chain from sunlight towards animal power is very bad.

The efficiency from sunlight towards ethanol stored energy is approx 0,15%.

Imagine that you don't convert the corn/grass into a fuel which we can directly use but first feed it to an animal which then has to process it and convert it into mechanical action.

And how will you power an airplane with a horse?

It is known that the chain from sunlight towards animal power is very bad.

Please give some evidence and sources before we all have to go and wipe out all the animals. Presumably human power on this basis is also very bad so we have to wipe out people, and which power source for planes is good?

I let Obama eat grass in a field, then walk him to the next field where he hoes the crops. If you can use the same amount of grass to produce ethanol to pull the hoe I will be seriously impressed. Would you like to tell us how you are going to achieve your GOOD results so I can go out and shoot my BAD system.

Simon

Everyone yells that after all the primary source of all our energy is the sun.

So compare the efficiency of the energy form selected starting from the sun until the real job is finished.

What surface of grassland is needed to feed the pony?

You say no as you just let it eat the grass from the side of the road. but imagine everyone has a pony, there will be no grass left so everyone needs a piece of land to feeds it's pony. Is there sufficient room to feed 6000000000 pony's?

Now I want to watch television: will the pony which we use to commute be able to power a treadmill so that we can watch television, use our computer? No it has to rest and digest. So a second pony is needed for power generation. (will one be sufficient?)

Then I also want to eat bread, so I need some land to grow crops.

The balance is tilting.

Man could only improve it's life from the moment that we could replace animal power by motors.

The the hygienic situation: imagine all bankers in London to ride to the city with the pony-cab. The city will smell a bit. So romans already regulated the entrance of animals in their cities.

Now install some windmills in the sea, and organise that we all use trains and electric vehicles to commute. no pollution, no smell

No offence against pony's, but use them where they offer a benefit: the saddle chariot is nice to see and indeed they can improve the quality of life for the disabled. Just like dogs do. And we should invest way more in this domain.

BTW: what is the difference between a pony and a horse?

I don't pretend that pony power is the answer to everything, but I have shown that there are areas where the pony is more effective. Let us look at the benefits rather than pointing out the things it can't do. My car can't hoe row crops, does that make it a bad car.

Everything is solar, sure and the pony can feed itself on unfarmed land in harmony with an ecosystem. Examples are the Shetland pony, on Shetland, where it provided a power source grazing on land that sheep sneer at. If you want more work you will have to put in more food, but you always use more fuel for more work.

If we can discuss rationally what a pony can do, and how to make that pony power more effective, surely the preserve of engineering, we may find we can reduce fossil fuel use, reduce pollution and noise.

There are hundreds of jobs where we use a petrol engine to shift small objects, slowly over short distances, most of those jobs can be done by ponies. Recycling for instance. Does it really make sense to take a large truck to every house to collect recycling. Street collection by pony to a lorry pick up point would dramatically reduce fuel use and probably costs. The benefits to people in urban situations of having animals around are massive. I know. I work with animals in city centres and I see the joy it brings.

The difference between a pony and a horse varies from year to year. It used to be 12 hands, or in English 4 feet. A hand is 4 inches. Now it is 4 foot 10 inches. A small tough pony will pull an impressive weight as is shown by the number used during the second world war for transport.

Ponies also learn the job, so the operator can concentrate on other things and let the pony do the main work while the operator does the precision stuff, as in this video

Think of the potential if only we attached MODERN engineering to the ponies, and that is why I have come to this site. I am an inventor with no engineering background and I need help.

Simon

Broad base analogies will not prevail in niche orientation.

Face it this 'pony method' has merit within the niche as appropriate and skilled engineering implementation may better those of low estate or those wanting less to minimize impact to the environment within the niche categories.

Git down off your high horse and pitch in mate.

The topic isn't and attempt to reinvent the wheel rather to reduce it's rolling resistance an endeavor aid those invested or born into in the niche.

There are a number of societies throughout the world that still rely significantly on animal power- the Amish of Pennsylvania in the US and some Tibetan societies come to mind. If one reviews my original post about the history of energy use by humans, I note that the first external energy source of which humans availed themselves, animal power appears to have been one of the first to be exploited. While animal power can be quite effective on a localized basis, it is very difficult to see haw this can be utilized in a general fashion to address the global energy issues. First of all, had animal power been sufficient to meet the needs and desires of our predecessors, it is highly unlikely that so much effort would have been invested in alternatives to this primary source of external energy. Secondly, only about a quarter of the US population is required to generate all the food needed (and significant excess to share with the rest of the world), utilizing energy sources with significantly higher energy density than is available from animal power. It is difficult to accept that this level of food production would be viable utilizing only animal power. Transportation is another issue- one cannot ride one's horse or horse-drawn chariot across a major body of water. And my experience has been, a horse is a whole lot slower than an air plane. My personal preferred method of transportation is walking, which is even slower than riding a horse- so I am forced through the necessities of modern life to occasionally abandon my preferred mode to meet the demands of modern life...(Note- I personally own neither car nor horse, although I have recently been required to avail myself of both means).

When a body of water bars your path both you and a horse may proceed in a vessel designed to float powered by wind.

Is it actually required that we go, be physically present afar from home locales on a frequent basis. May a change of the physical presence vs. virtual relieve a considerable load from our conventional transportation fuel requirement?

A long-time hope in the business world has been that teleconferencing, and later, virtual meeting tools, would seriously reduce the need for a lot of business travel. In my experience, however, there is no substitution for face to face meetings, especially at the beginning of a relationship. There is a whole lot of information exchanged during a face to face meeting that goes beyond words exchanged, and that no one has figured out how to transmit reliably over electronic means. Many years ago, when video conferencing first hit the public imagination, there were a lot of jokes about "artificial backdrops" and even stand-in mannequins to disguise reality (and at least a few companies actually offered artificial backdrops for just this purpose).

One would hope that, once trust is established, the travel requirement would be lessened. However, just yesterday I had to take a short flight to visit a construction site- although I originally resisted the need to make the trip, it turned out to be critical because I discovered things that would not have been obvious through typical photo coverage by the contractor, and, without immediate corrective action, could have resulted in the need for some very expensive corrective actions down the road. I don't know how to do that virtually...

Can you drive your car, train, lorry or even walk across a body of water? To deride horsepower on a basis that excludes all transport forms except hovercraft is hardly a balanced and considered assessment of the possibilities. No a horse won't launch weather satellites, but nor will a boat or a 40 ton truck. Why not look at what horsepower can do, rather than pointing out that there are things it can't do. I am not stupid , I am well aware of the limitations, I just want people to look at the possibilities. If horsepower could reduce carbon emissions by 1% that would be a benefit. Don't criticise that horsepower can't perform miracles, very few of us can. Converting grass to forward motion without any input from man seems like a useful ability. Can you get grass to produce ethanol without any equipment, and achieve forward motion without any equipment. My pony can produce forward motion from grass Could that be beneficial?

Are the Amish and Tibetans really the largest users of horsepower? Do no other societies use animal power? Why are wind and solar worth looking at and horsepower isn't?

My pony and I are replacing two men and a tractor when hoeing row crops in Brecon in Wales. So the pony is replacing a tractor and a man. Isn't that significant, or worth looking at?

Saddlechariot-

I'm sorry you considered my comments as a negative assessment of horse power. I started by pointing out that there are societies in today's world that rely primarily on this, and this is a good thing. The example of "crossing water" was intended to point out why our ancestors may have found it necessary to look for alternatives for at least some applications. I also noted that I was recently required to avail myself of utilizing a horse for transportation for lack of any practical alternative to reach a job site (a two hour horseback ride vs. a two day trek on foot up a mountain). I am not against ANY alternative that is considered under an appropriate scenario.

I am a strong proponent of utilizing appropriate technology to meet one's personal needs. The solution to the "energy problem" is going to require each of us to reduce our demand for distributed power. Were I living in Chiriqui, a province in the west of Panama, a horse would be an appropriate mode of transportation, because there is an effective infrastructure to support this mode. Unfortunately, I am currently forced to reside in Panama City, where a horse would not be very practical...

Sorry if my earlier words offended you.

Charlie

That's OK, I just find that it is almost impossible to get anyone to look at the vast number of areas where ponies and horses can be a sensible solution to the problem. Now is a good moment to start again, but not by using horses and ponies with archaic equipment, but by applying modern technology to the issue.

I build collars with stainless steel tube, HDPE and sheepskin, ie the best materials I can find to do the best job in 2009. I am not even vaguely trying to recreate some mythical golden era, not trying to go back to a better time, just trying to apply good engineering to a problem.

When you ask engineering questions, you don't expect to be told what the Aztecs did, or some religious group with a fear of the modern, is doing, you want modern engineering answers. I am applying modern engineering to pony and horse drawn equipment, criticise my engineering by all means but don't suggest that 1800 was the pinnacle of engineering and material science.

Windmill designers aren't sitting around wearing clogs and traditional Dutch costumes, they are wind tunnel testing and using computer simulation. We need to apply the same attitude to pony and horse drawn equipment.

Sorry about the rant, but this is a serious issue and looking forward is a necessity.

Simon

Replaced 2 men & a tractor, Really??? Please elaborate on this feat.

Horses do make good lawnmowers, nearly as good as goats.

I will reply if I believe I am going to be treated fairly. Horses make good lawnmowers. So that is why they died in hundreds of thousands in the first and second wars, the army decided they needed lawnmowers. So what did the soldiers die as? Christmas decorations.

The link to the farm is here http://www.beaconsveggieboxes.co.uk/Saddle%20Chariot.htm

This was written in the early stages of developement, the pony now happily works rowcrops with one person steering pony and hoe. This is the result of two months unfunded developement at the end of 9 years of being sneered at by the equestrian establishment. I didn't expect engineers instinctive reaction to be a sneer which is why I am on this site.

If you are going to sneer at horsepower, I suggest the engineering community settle down and remove every refernce to horsepower from their literature. Or alternatively, try looking at what ponies and horses can do.

The fact that only the poor, and developing countries still use horsepower on a major scale is no reason to sneer, but it does explain why so little has been done to improve the technology. These aren't big money customers. With global warming imminent, it may just be worth looking at ideas that don't produce wodges of cash, but which might produce benefits.

There are a whole range of factors with my row crop system that need improving, and almost all the problems are engineering ones. Could we set up a seperate topic so those who don't want to consider the possibilities of horsepower needn't be offended by the topic.

Simon

and to explain the rant, no British Equestrian Organisation will allow me to show them the saddlechariot system. None of them have ever looked and none of them will let me show them. I drive in a wheelchair, on my own in total safety and Riding For the Disabled refuse to look at the system. I have a letter from them stating they have NEVER looked at anything I have done, and should they wish to, they will approach me.

I have been waiting 8 years. Again there is a lot of engineering where I would appreciate help, and where my disabled customers would appreciate help, but if horses are just lawnmowers, I don't expect much help.

More recent photographs and video of the system in work on commercial farm are here

Hi Simon,

I don't see any advantage to ponies over tractors. As you pointed out this is an engineering site, data of some sort would be appropriate

Like Chris I have a horse, but also don't have any illusions...Equine power will never be more than a tiny niche solution.

My 1200 pound quarter horse can eat far more than my single acre will grow, here in sunny California, watering every day. On a positive note our fire danger is minimized & I don't ever have to mow.

Gwen elaborated on my point about the amount of farm land needed to feed horses & ponies.

All that being said, please feel free to ask any questions you like!

I was wondering why stainless steel, not aluminum or carbon fiber?

How can we help you Simon?

Hi Garthh,

You bring up another good point to not live where life isn't sustainable or adapt your life to the conditions at hand.

Where as the environment where I am can support 4 to 5 horses per acre you're area may support 1 horse per ten acres, in some areas 60 acres are required per horse.

Early this year in areas of Indiana wise folks were out cultivating by hand rather than run the tractor, yeah 30+ folks out in the field and they weren't Amish.

I have doubts about 4-5 horses per acre.

A ballpark figure is horses eat 1-3% of their body weight per day. The amount of work individual horses do will also affect the numbers. For the sake of the discussion lets say a horse eats 5 times his weight per year. I pulled up figures of around 3-4 tons of hay/acre/yr. A 1200# horse will need 6000#s of hay/yr. so it may be possible for 1acre to support 1 horse... 4-5 would have to be small ponies. When it comes to prime movers size & temperament do matter . You aren't gonna see a lot of Arabian plow horses...

When I actually do an estimate of my possible productive acreage, I've probably only got 1/2 an acre. The horse rotates between 3 pastures only 2 of them being irrigated. My house, driveway,barn & ect all take up room. This years small garden is being expanded for next year.

I occasionally use the horse to drag a felled tree closer to the wood pile, it's generally easier to do it my self or use my truck...

This property is getting more productive as more organic matter is worked in.

Which brings up something else horses are, compost factories....

I see plenty of crops being harvested by hand, that doesn't make it efficient. Raisins have the bunches girlded on the vine, 2weeks later cut down & layed out on paper on the ground, 2 more weeks rolled into bundles, couple more days harvest. The list of crops that are harvested by hand is endless. Lettuce & melons are literally vacumn cooled & packaged on small rolling production lines in the field, but still harvested by hand...

I grew up in Amish country [northern Indiana], all very interesting [I miss shipshewanna & fresh bread], but not practical for the entire planet...

I goofed is is 1.5 plus the odd donkey and colts per/acre, average hay production is 12-16 bales per/acre. I don't know what I was thinking Hay per acre is variable depending upon geography and seasonal effects, western North Dakota for example avg 4-6/acre but eastern ND is about 14-17/acre. In California's central valley are places where the water table is 2-4 feet below the surface and remnants of peat are the surface soils produce incredible grazing conditions but machinery is just too heavy.

Surprisingly Bedouin's use Arabian plow horses for everything except crossing water and flying

There are serious advantages of animals over tractors: the quality of your field is improving when using animals in stead of tractors.

Tractors do compact the soil, animal feet open it up and mix the top layer.

Working with animals also reduce the ability to really work deep: this is also an advantage. (typical western farmers do cultivate way to much and "kill" the soil)

But on the other hand: if we want to feed all humans we will need to use tractors.

The forum title is sustainable engineering, on that basis the pony is clearly better than any tractor. For a start some ponies can make more ponies and no tractors can make tractors. Secondly I am using and talkking about 500lb ponies, so the fact that a 1200lb horse isn't efficient isn't relevant. Large horse were developed in part as a subsitute for good engineering. Wheels were crude, bearings were wood on wood, and strength was unpredictable. The old adage that double the diamaeter is half the work is true for wooden wheels on wooden axles with pigg fat as the bearing system. I use 20mm sealed bearings on beefed up, kite buggy, 16X6.50X8 wheel tyre assemblies.

You say this is only a tiny niche solution, read the United Nations on the topic.

http://www.fao.org/ag/ags/agse/chapterps1/chapterps1-e.htm

and if it was only 1% of the problem and we can solve it, we only need 99 other ideas of similar niche relevance and the whole damn problem is solved.

If, on my own, I could have solved the whole damn problem I wouldn't be coming to an engineering forum coming and asking for help, and if more people read the UN's comments on the subject, I wouldn't have Chris sneering at me in his holier than thou, I love horses more than you do way without even the courtesy of looking at what i do.

Back to your questions, I use stainless because I can work in it, because 35x35 box fits in 40x40 box with 2mm wall, because it fails progressively and because I like it. Also with a base vehicle at 35kg, of which 10kg is the wheels and tyres, I don't get much benefit using lighter materials. Actially I am switching to using more HDPE

The areas where I need help are a simple way of calculating the caster and trail on a trailing fully castering offset rear wheel on a three wheeler. Imagine a motorcycle sidecar outfit towed backwards by a pony. The problem is the speed wobble which builds up. Increased caster and shifting the weight to the rear seems to help, but since this is for the wheelchair version, I have a range of weights from 100 to 300 lbs, and weight distribution isn't totally predictable.

All I want is a pony/horse drawn vehicle that the seriously disabled can drive in safety across country at a fast canter, on their own. I suspect i need variable caster and trail to cope with all the possible variables, especially as there are three different positions, altering the height and position of the drivers centre of gravity, all with their own distinct advantages.

Obviously Chris couldn't answer any of this because mobility for the disabled and allowing them off road is irrelevant compared to asking a pony to do some work, and he is far too kind to do that. Riding For the Disabled have stated in writing that they have never looked at ANY of my work and never will so Chris is in really good company by refusing to look at what I am doing.

Other areas where I am working are row crop cultivation to reduce pesticides and herbicides, and the design and materials for hoe blades and discs are critical. Can we use plastic, if so which, what is the best angle of attack for a hoe blade, how do we stop it picking up couch grass etc.

As engineers this is virgin territiory. Who has done serious work on horsepowered equipment for the last 70 years? A horse was reckoned in England to use the produce of 4 acres, but we are talking 1500lb heavy horse and ineefficient farming. But they still used them and they generated a lot more food than they used. Remember that cutting edge technology was all about two items; swords and ploughshares, and

you beat one into the other, becuase any bit of high grade steel needed to be working. But rather than drag a blade through the ground, can we convert rotary motion oir whetever.

Enough for this one, but there are a whole series of other possibities, especially battery electric powered eqipment and natural gas powered

Simon

GA Simon

Great explanation. Except Speed, everywhere animal power wins, thats what I think. But unfortunately Anthropocentric world is at its full force to exploit everything possible at the earliest pace. This is surely going to take the human race to dire end at same great speed.

You didn't comment on the accuracy of my math, pertaining to consumption & acreage for equine.

I've started a new thread: Improved methods of animal powered transportation & cultivation

OOPs

Thanks Bwire

Minimize caster and increase negative camber, ride height lesser to the rear

Minimize caster and increase negative camber, ride height lesser to the rear

sorry, not sure what you mean. I find with increased caster and greater wight aft, it tends to run straighter. The rear wheel is single and behind the right front wheel, will camber on the front, make a difference, if so which way and how much.

Simon

what is the orientation of all wheels

Why don't we start at the beginning.

Tell us how much payload you want to move, the dimensions of the payload, the prime mover[pony], the type of terrain you need to cross, the maximum speed you would be going & any other pertinent information.

Make up a wish list for each product you would like to design...

I could join in the argument about your choice of prime mover, but lets just think about it as if we were going to throw a harness on a couple of 250 pound humans to move their disabled grandparent around...

Here is the basic concept in version 3B

you can see the degree of trail and caster angle from the upright forward of and above the wheel centre. The reason for three wheels is that it keeps a short wheel base while allowing wheelchair access to a floor only 8"b off the ground.

The instant release system means at any sign of trouble the animal can escape without dragging the vehicle with it.. This system works, except for the speed wobble at high speeds, which in this instance means over 10 mph going downhill. Uphill the pull from the pony stabilises the system.

Simon

Are there any kind of brakes?

Surge brakes would help your downhill instability problem. Hydraulic or mechanical brakes could actuate when the weight shifted on the cart from pulling to pushing.

The quick release could also be tied in...

My equine experience is anything that can go wrong will.

Brakes are a necessity, but not fitted yet as I am rebuilding the entire chassis. The wheel steering layout will stay the same. Brakes are only to stop the vehicle, since a horse can pull a plough through the ground, they tend not to notice a wheel on top of the ground, so I am hoping that three 140mm bicycle discs, mechanical not hydraulic, linked as you say to the quick rlease and operating as over run brakes, and with separate handbrake lever should do the trick. But the heart of the system is the ability to cut the horse loose. Horse drawn vehicle risks are all caused by attaching a horse. Static they are remarkably harmless, as are loose horses and ponies.

Simon

Negative camber of the two front wheels about (0-15'). You may need a dampener on the rear pivoting wheel to prevent a hi-speed wobble and I'd suggest a leading link for the single rear wheel suspension

similar to

Many thanks. I had thought of using a damper, and there are two ways, one on the castering wheel steering head, or using foam between the shafts and the pony. However if possible I wanted to kill the wobble at source.

I will try Camber on the front wheels.

Simon

What does the pony have to say about 'good engineering practice'?

I don't personally speak Pony, but I would hazard a guess it would be something like "get this $^F*%& off my back and haul your own S$%&^* across the F$%^*$ field!

I don't imagine that the anthropomorphic bs about beerwagon-hauling clydesdales is really the truth. It really is slavery of another species. and not a very high power-to-weight ratio at that.

just my opinion mind you... and yes, I've raised a horse before. I know what is involved. I don't think it an optimal solution, when a biofuel powered tractor can do the job. (with two people, if you wish)

I'm not trying to be disrespectful of your engineering, which I think is just fine, or any of your claims. I guess I just prefer to not have to deal with the living being. Sure, animals need exercise, and work is good... but just strap a pack on your back, and have someone harness you, and make you work all day in the sun...

we humans are connected to all living things, like it or not. If we are going to go 'green', should this subjugation of living species not be considered? If saving the environment is important, and such things as rain forest, and saving species is part of that, then surely saving the ponies from forced labour should be on the agenda, while the pandas and whales have their freedom!

Chris

Actually, Chris, most animals that have developed a synergistic relationship with humans (OK, if you must, they have been "domesticated"- as if they don't have a choice) have derived some pretty significant advantages- such as free medical care, plentiful food and water, advanced breeding opportunities, protection from other predators, to mention just a few. Asking them to do a little work in return does not seem out of line. Of course, I am not proposing that they be overburdened or underfed or otherwise abused...

You have never met my pony, seen it work, assessed any of the harness I have designed, the equpiment I have developed or the work we do, and you know what my pony says to me.

"I guess I just prefer to not have to deal with the living being."

So all your friends and colleagues, pets etc are robots, what do you eat if you don't want to deal with living beings, which includes all vegetables.

I bet when you walk in to join all your robot friends they turn round and say "Isn't Chris stupid".

You say you have raised horses, Mummy and Daddy to them, were you? Personally I believe in leaving them with their own herd till they are old enough to learn about work. They need to learn to be horses, and the problems trying to deal with hand reared horses are major. Most trainers nightmare is the human reared animal. It just doesn't understand how to behave to other animals (which includes people).

I suppose your bio fulelled tractor will be built with steel mined by tough guys like you with pick axes, or do you just envisage this sort of work being done by poor people in foreign countries. See my other posts on the subject of sneering at anything to do with horses, and your concern for living things doesn't really convince me.

The work that my pony Obama is doing, doesn't even raise a sweat, but to me would be back breaking labour. Unexercised ponies die every year of laminitis, a condition caused by standing around in lush fields doing nothing, so your pet pony standing around while you haul the hoe, will be suffering appallingly, is that what you really want?

These ponies, horses, zebras, etc, have been around longer than mankind. Only through accidental development of human intelligence have we been able to gain advantage over their natural defenses, and to somewhat domesticate them. they are largely plains animals.. born to the grasslands.. to run free. we've taken that away.

It is sheer human arrogance to see them as 'work animals'.

I've always loved horses... its why I wanted to own one.. but I loved horses for who and what they are, not what they can do for me... same way I love people. the strength, the beauty the intelligence, the relationship.... so a horse is beautiful before you put a harness on it, and a slave after.

tell you what.. design a 'voluntary harness, and attach it to the chariot, and then you wait on the chariot.. When the pony feels like doing some gardening.. he will voluntarily step into the harness, and off you go... I am sure you won't have long to wait.

Chris.

so let's just put an end to this and say I'm against using animals for energy production, unless our lives are on the line... not against you at all. If you want to use your pony to farm your own land, that is well within your rights and common practice. no problem. I am objecting to the 'engineering use of animals for nationalized energy production' I think we have many other options yet.

PS. I wrote this on one of my robot friend laptop. :)

let's just put an end to this and say I'm against using animals for energy production, unless our lives are on the line... not against you at all. If you want to use your pony to farm your own land, that is well within your rights and common practice. no problem. I am objecting to the 'engineering use of animals for nationalized energy production' I think we have many other options yet.

The notion comes off as quite naive...you don't seem that type, though our lives are on the line every day, that is the reality of reality.

Not just naive, offensive to all those using animal power. Chris harms no animals driving cars along roads with squashed bodies of animals all over the place, the seas are full of ships shredding fishes with their props and deafening whales with their engine note. Planes suck birds into their engines and spit out vapourised birds, but this is all kind to animals becuase Chris approves.

I work a pony without whips, bits or pressure and get attacked. I have said it elsewhere Chris, read the UN comments on the subject and tell them they don't know what they are talking about. But I must also thank Chris, his sneering made me go out and look for the figures on draught animals and I came up with this site which answers not only the questions raised, but a whole load more.

Please understand that the fact that an issue has been swept under the carpet, doesn't make it irrelevant. This really matters and engineering is what is needed. Get cutting edge technology into cutting grass without huge tractors, cutting soil ditto, the list is endless, just read what the

Agricultural Engineering Branch

Agricultural Support Systems Division

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

say

Animal power has many benefits

Animal power is a renewable energy source that is particularly suited to family-level farming and to local transport. Animal power is generally affordable and accessible to the smallholder farmers, who are responsible for much of the world's food production. The availability of animal power allows women and men to increase their efficiency and reduce their drudgery, compared with manual alternatives. The combination of timeliness and timesaving in field operations promotes the achievement of higher and more reliable crop yields. The transport role of animals is important for carrying farm inputs (seeds, fertilisers, and crop protection requisites) and outputs (harvested crops and animal products). The work animals themselves contribute to food production through milk, meat, manure and offspring. Pack animals and carts facilitate the marketing of produce, stimulating local trade and production. Animals can be very important for carrying domestic water and fuel, reducing drudgery (particularly for women) and releasing time that can be used in other productive or socially important tasks. Animal power requires little or no foreign exchange. Money spent on motors and machinery is exported from rural areas. Money invested in animal power circulates within rural areas, helping to revitalise rural economies. While motorised power also brings many benefits, animal power is normally more available and affordable to people in rural areas and fragile environments.

Women, men and children all benefit from animal power

Provided access to animal power is widespread, animal power can benefit all members of society. Access may come from ownership, which provides timeliness. However, most communities have systems for borrowing or hiring animal power, so spreading the costs and benefits. Historically, men have tended to control animal power technologies, including ploughing and transport. In many countries, women are having increased access to work animals. Women, as major carriers of water, fuel wood, food grains and agricultural products can benefit particularly from transport animals.

Donkey as pack-animal in Cape Verde

Donkeys as efficient and easily managed transport animals, can be of special benefit to women. In most countries women still have less access to work animals and related support services than men, but women are increasingly involved in controlling animals for agricultural operations, such as ploughing and weeding.

By controlling work animals, children too can contribute to household tasks and family production without excessive physical strain. However, as children attend schools, certain traditional animal-management practices are no longer practicable. Appropriate low-cost alternative management and grazing systems are needed to suit changing family labour profiles. Partial urban migration of male workers also influences labour availability for agricultural operations. Animal power can help to overcome peak labour shortages. It can also assist in the creation of rural employment opportunities, in the agricultural (large- and small-scale), infrastructure support and transport sectors.

Animal power is a forgotten solution

Despite its many benefits, animal power is old technology. Although its use is actually increasing in many countries, it is seldom included in educational curricula. For the past fifty years, books on farming, whether for school children or agricultural students, have focused on tractor power. The result is that most extension agents, researchers, decision-makers and teachers have never studied animal power topics in detail. With the new generation the vicious circle of neglect increases. This is compounded by international media (television, films, publications) in which animal power is seldom portrayed and perceived by younger generation as old technology. Although food security and self-reliance are important goals, urban-based planners and politicians often ignore the importance of animal power to rural people, as governments tackle the issues of modernisation, industrialisation and urbanisation.

The duality of animal power for transport and fieldwork requires broader responsibility and not confined to agriculture. Transport ministries seldom deal with animal power, even though pack animals or carts are useful in rural transport systems. Similarly, using animals for labour-intensive road construction can be highly cost-effective, but ministry staffs are only trained to plan capital-intensive projects. Animal power can also be efficiently and profitably employed in forestry and for specific operations on estates and large-scale farms.

The technology is simple and reliable but needs attention

Ploughing is often the major farming operation performed by work animals. Animal-drawn seeder and weeder are becoming increasingly important, as these facilitate rapid and timely operations. Work animals can assist with field levelling, crop harvesting and on-farm transport. In some countries, animals are employed for field irrigation and for crop processing.

Although most animal-drawn equipment is quite simple, its design is crucial. The implements and spares must be easily available to farmers. In countries with a long history of animal power, traditional ploughs tend to be very persistent. Not only have the designs been proven over hundreds of years, but local infrastructure exists for their manufacture and maintenance.

Blacksmiths in Honduras

Village blacksmiths provide responsive, timely and inexpensive services. If factory-made implements are to be used effectively, comparable rural supply and support services are required. Traditional wooden designs of animal-drawn cart are still produced in some countries. However, there is a worldwide trend towards the use of carts with roller bearings and tyres, using factory-made axles or parts of old vehicles. In the remote rural areas, a shortage of such axles and tyres often constrains the development of cart production and use. Once a critical mass of carts is in place, the technology becomes self-sustaining and animal-based transport systems expand, with major social and economic benefits for the area. For animals to be used humanely and efficiently, good and affordable harnessing systems are required. Village-level production of suitable yokes or harnesses is not usually a problem except when new animal traction operations or species are being adopted.

Animal power is sustainable and environmentally friendly

Animal power is a renewable energy source that can be sustained in rural areas with little external input. The use of animal power in mixed farming systems encourages crop-livestock integration and sustainable farming practices. Not only do work animal produce their own organic manure, they provide transport for manure of other livestock to the fields. This enhances the fertility and structure of the soil. The condition of work animals, and the production of other farm stock, is assisted by transport and storage of crop residues and fodder.

Terracing work using oxen in Indonesia

Animal power can be used for a wide range of land management and erosion control systems. Animal-drawn scoops or levellers can assist with water harvesting or the construction of water ponds. In hilly areas, animals can assist with contour ploughing and terracing. Live mulch using multipurpose green plants or leguminous shrubs provides animal feed.

In drought-affected areas, over-grazing may become a problem, particularly around water points. Farmers can make increased use of donkeys, which survive drought better than cattle. Another response is to make greater use of reproductive animals. These strategies allow farmers to obtain essential work from diminishing herds. The emissions of methane by working cattle are negligible in comparison to other sources.

Animal-powered transport: profitable, increasing production and stimulating development

Rural women in Zimbabwe

In much of the world, head and shoulder loading women are the main transports of goods in the rural areas. They carry domestic requirements (water and fuel wood), food grains, farm produce, traded items, hand tools and children. With animal transport, their burden is eased and time is saved for other activities with economic and social benefits. As women farmers and traders are freed from the limitations of head loading, more is produced and traded, increasing profits and overall economic activity.

Animal-powered transport can be of particular social and economic benefit. Farmers with animal transport (carts or pack animals) have wider contacts with traders. The resulting enhanced market access allows them to increase their production and also their profit. With animal transport, greater use is made of manure and crop residues, which increases overall farm production. Animal power can provide important local `feeder' transport between farms and roads, to complement motorised road transport systems. The development of efficient animal-based transport is often constrained by limited supplies of carts and capital or credit for acquisition. However, animal-based transport is usually very profitable. As long as there are sufficient numbers of carts in an area, local artisans ensure the technology is sustainable.

Oxen-cart transporting harvests to local market in Zimbabwe

Well-managed animals are dependable power sources

Many different animals can be used for work. Suitable animals must be able to thrive under local conditions and be strong enough for the work required. They must be affordable and locally available. In many cases, cattle of the local breed provide the best compromise. Cattle grow during their working life and appreciate in value. As farming systems intensify, farmers often find it more profitable to use cows for intermittent or light operations. Well-fed cows can work as well as producing milk and calves. In many countries, horses, donkeys and mules are employed mainly for rural transport. Donkeys are becoming increasingly important in agricultural production and rural transport systems because of their low cost and longevity.

Spraying cattle against ticks in Uganda

Good animal health is a prerequisite for the success of animal traction. Animal sickness and mortality can be particularly serious where animal traction technology, or a new type of animal, is being introduced. Many health problems can be avoided by a combination of indigenous knowledge and modern prevention systems (vaccination/prophylactics).

Conserving fodder in Albania

The importance of good animal management (including grooming, feeding, watering and attention to harnessing) is not always appreciated. Animals gain their energy from grazing or supplementary feeding. Seasonal scarcity of feed normally leads to seasonal changes in animal weight. While animals can recover condition, ploughing can be delayed by poor animal condition at the end of a dry season. Purpose-grown fodder species or supplementary rations may be technically possible, but are often unaffordable. The use of by-products or the preservation of multipurpose fodder (e.g., groundnut hay) may be more appropriate.

Animals are complementary to other power sources

Manual, animal and engine power sources are all important in agricultural development. Animals and engine powered machines help to reduce human drudgery and allow people to achieve more with their time.

Tractors and draught animals complement farm power needs in Bolivia

Engine power, where available and affordable, can achieve the highest savings in time and labour. Many smallholder farmers would like to benefit from tractor power, but such aspirations are often unrealistic. Engine power tends to be appropriate for large-scale farming and long-distance transport. Animals are often more affordable and appropriate for small-scale farming and local transport. Individual tractor ownership is seldom possible for farmers with small areas of cultivation, unless they have high-value crops, irrigation and/or multiple cropping (e.g., irrigated rice production). Tractor hire (public or private) is seldom viable to smallholder farmers in rain-fed, food-production systems. Work animals and engine powered (tractors, trucks and pick-ups) can coexist in the same area - even on the same farm. Tractors is better adapted for power-intensive operations (e.g., ploughing) and for large areas of land. Animals may be more appropriate and affordable for control-intensive operations (e.g., weeding) and on small areas of land. Produce may be transported from the fields with animals, and to the towns by trucks. The increased use of tractors and motorised vehicles for transport can even be associated with an increased use of animals, as the overall rural economy grows and diversifies.

Animal power issues should be encompassed within development strategies

Animal power can be an important and viable technology for rural development. It should be one integral component of rural development and mechanisation strategies. In recent years, it has become common to include environmental and gender impact statements in development strategy documents. In a similar way, animal power options in plans relating to food security, rural infrastructure and services and transport should be considered. Whether or not animal power is already widely used the future potential for animal energy to complement other power sources should be assessed, and the practical implications reviewed.

The neglect of animal power technology in recent years may have affected the availability of essential information. In many areas there may be insufficient facts and understanding to allow informed judgements on animal power issues. In such circumstances, participatory appraisal surveys may be required at national or provincial level. Such surveys will establish the present uses of work animals, the existing constraints and the future potential.

Attention should be paid to the infrastructure and services needed to sustain animal power use. The experience of many countries is that animal power can develop and be sustained by small-scale private sector enterprises, provided there is a critical mass of users. It may be important to develop, or to maintain, such a critical mass, to ensure the technology is sustainable. Integrated planning is required since initiatives in one domain (e.g., subsidised tractors, and promotion of new breeds) may affect other areas (e.g., water distribution, rural transport).

Dear Saddlechariot,

I never sneered.. not even once. I also did not disrespect you. If you feel that, I apologize. I fairly and conscientiously objected to the complete one-sided point of view to the use of living animals to support human objectives. If you take it personally, you miss my point entirely. It was never about you.

On the contrary, I believe everything you say about the efficiencies of animal power, and agree with it. I also think that you are bang on, on re-engineering older technologies with new materials and solutions, such as low friction sealed bearings, etc. I grew up in a county that had annual festivals called 'pioneer days' and I have seen hundreds of ingenious technologies powered by animal and steam. this can only be improved by modern technology. that was never my point.

this is. "Animal power is a forgotten solution"... so is slavery.

Sorry, had so much manure over the years I tend to get my retaliation in first.

The thing I am working on is a system where first and formost, no force is used on the animal. Rule one, no weapons, ie whips bits or spurs are allowed, rule two, nobody is allowed to deliberately frighten the animal.

Bribery with carrots, scratches under the chin, kind words is very definitely in. I now also reward Obama with carrots when he bites me, as this is normally a reminder that something is loose, in the wrong place, or possibly that he is highly pissed off. This blog on Biting gives and idea of my thought processes.

My harness design is entirely modern and eliminates all the oldfashioned rubs sores and galls that most traditional types accept. I don't accept any discomfort.

The work I am aiming to do, is the stuff which is done by a tractor because you have got the tractor, not because you need a tractor. Hoeing row crops is classic. 35horsepower tractors are used to pull seven gardeners harrows through well tilled soil. Obama, my 11hh pony will pull this sort of kit through 5,000 brassicas in 40 minutes, ie slightly faster than a tractor with steerable hoe and two people can do the job.

I suspect that plastic hoe blades might make the kit, not only lighter, but easier to machine and modify on site, and I believe there are light weight rotary options, turned by their forward motion, which could be very effective.

If this means that the tractor is used for the grunt, and for the real power it is capable of delivering, and animals are used for the jobs at which they excel, everyone benefits. I am not going to ruin a superb pony making him do a job that will hurt him, and if he dislikes it, the message conveyed by his teeth to my arm or backside is pretty clear. I always test any job within easy and comfortable biting range, and 5 lbs pressure on the reins through a rope halter is the maximum force I use on Obama.

The slavery issue is more complex. All animals are treated as slaves, or worse. We destroy their homes and their environment without a thought. Companies make a living out of this and are called pest controllers. And for huge chunks of the world, the choice is between the animal hauling appalling weights or pregnant women or children hauling appalling weights.

It is instructive that ponies only went down coal mines because the mine owners were not allowed to use small children as beasts of burden. The Industrial Revolution was built on human slavery, animal slavery was a step forward, for the people at the bottom of the heap, and then we harnessed fossil fuels releasing people and animals from hauling weights, but unfortunately stuffing the environement in the process.

So lets look at what animals can do without suffering, and one factor which engineers could help with is a way of measuring the work and intensity, that Obama does, so we can come up with a code of conduct. My vehicle has a safety release system, I would be happy to add a system that released the pony the minute the work was excessive.

At present i rely on his ears, and his teeth to tell me. But I would far rather have a high tech and painless solution. I always pulll the equipment I want Obama to pull, myself, to get an idea of the loads, but any extra data would help.

There are solutions out there, and I quite agree the animal's welfare is paramount. I want systems that help monitor the welfare.

Simon

my point.

this is. "Animal power is a forgotten solution"... so is slavery.

Wow, I do not wish argue this point, you are both right and wrong trouble is much of the world hasn't caught up with you.

http://www.answers.com/topic/animal-powered-transport

What strikes me the most is that all examples you come up with use animals as they have no access to other sources of power (except for the oxes in ice fields)

Did you know about the typical use of dogs to pull little chariots for final distribution?

The dogs where used in milk distribution and special breeds where created.

It is now forbidden to let a dog work for you (at least where I live) but the dogs are replaced as soon as motorised transport became widely available. But they also had advantages.

Unless for special reasons, really special reasons (like you're example of the saddle chariot) animals will not make part of the future in power generation.

To start they are way to inefficient, the power/volume and weight is also very bad.

Not to speak about the fact that they are unreliable. (sorry no air-co today, it is to hot for the pony's to work)

Sorry to repeat myself but read the FAO UN report

eg

In many countries the use of animal power is expanding. In sub-Saharan Africa, in particular, the use of work animals for agriculture and rural transport is increasing every year.

and

Animal power is a forgotten solution

Despite its many benefits, animal power is old technology. Although its use is actually increasing in many countries, it is seldom included in educational curricula. For the past fifty years, books on farming, whether for school children or agricultural students, have focused on tractor power. The result is that most extension agents, researchers, decision-makers and teachers have never studied animal power topics in detail. With the new generation the vicious circle of neglect increases. This is compounded by international media (television, films, publications) in which animal power is seldom portrayed and perceived by younger generation as old technology. Although food security and self-reliance are important goals, urban-based planners and politicians often ignore the importance of animal power to rural people, as governments tackle the issues of modernisation, industrialisation and urbanisation.

The duality of animal power for transport and fieldwork requires broader responsibility and not confined to agriculture. Transport ministries seldom deal with animal power, even though pack animals or carts are useful in rural transport systems. Similarly, using animals for labour-intensive road construction can be highly cost-effective, but ministry staffs are only trained to plan capital-intensive projects. Animal power can also be efficiently and profitably employed in forestry and for specific operations on estates and large-scale farms.

This isn't me, this is the UN. Are they all ignorant and deluded and trying to plead a selfish agenda?

Simon

I have the idea that you are a bit off track with the blog title: Energy Sources and Their Development.

Animals can be used in transportation and other special tasks and indeed they are in many cases overlooked. (eg forestry and small scale farming)

But as energy source they can not solve world hunger: we simply need way to much of the stuff.

It is now forbidden to let a dog work for you (at least where I live).

Does that include sheep dogs? It would be impossible to maintain the highlands of the UK without Border Collies (or equivalent).

Sheep dogs are somewhere between the lines allowed: the only thing they do is running round and bark from time to time. (but we rarely see it here)

But it is forbidden to let dog's do physical work like pulling chariots.

Helping the unabled is also work for a dog, but again, it doesn't require much more from the animal than walking.

the only thing they do is running round and bark from time to time.

Try telling shepherds that.

Simon

I know it is a bit more complex: but they don't carry the sheep back to the flock

It is amasing how they can be teached like that while I'm really lucky that my dog comes when I call him.

Gwen

They run for miles on appalling terrain. I doubt many human athletes would stand a chance of working those distances on that terrain, let alone at the speeds and with the shepherding abilities.

To understand working animals you need to understand the degree to which the animals' intelligence is critical to the work. This is true of most working animals.

Your dog has read that you're working for him I suppose and that is legal

If Gwen has a dog that can read, he [Gwen] shouldn't wasting his time with this lot

Unless for special reasons, really special reasons (like you're example of the saddle chariot) animals will not make part of the future in power generation.

Are you confusing the future with the present? Presently animals are a part of power generation for parts of the world you refuse to acknowledge.

Thanks and GA

There are a number of societies throughout the world that still rely significantly on animal power- the Amish of Pennsylvania in the US and some Tibetan societies come to mind.

Why only Amish and Tibetan? It is estimated that the 70% of transportation (Tons. Kms) in India is by animal power!

Only problem with animal power is the speed, where modern machines beat the animal power.

I am well aware of the fact that many societies rely on varying degrees of animal power- I offered the Amish and Tibetans off the top of my head because they were the first to come to mind. It is neither an endorsement nor a criticism of their chosen lifestyle, nor did I intend to offend through omission of others...

Oh my friend!

I didn't take it as offence. It was just addition to your information with some estimated figure about the reasonally advanced civilisation. I do not know anything about Amish, but Tibetians are not really much advanced, (I suppose)

When you use energy the rules are very well defined... http://canada.theoildrum.com/node/4495

An unmapped fund... http://www.globalgeothermal.com/

http://gregor.us/coal/the-burden-of-transition/

an untapped venues... http://gregor.us/california/the-opposite-of-eureka/

http://gregor.us/uncategorized/marijuana-first-then-the-oil/

toxic ... http://gregor.us/california/washingtons-dilemma/

http://gregor.us/coal/its-a-planet-of-slums/