For centuries, civilizations have harnessed energy from water. However, hydropower often requires large bodies of water to move heavy machinery, confining its use to rivers. But what if the electricity needed to light up your house could be generated from raindrops hitting its roof? 

To achieve this, scientists rely on electrical charges created when materials come into contact and then separate, a phenomenon called the triboelectric effect. As an example, rubbing a balloon against your hair gives them opposite charges, causing your hair to stand up and stick to the balloon. Scientists apply the same principle to make droplet-based triboelectric nanogenerators, or D-TENGS, where raindrops slide across negatively charged surfaces. As the droplets move, their positive charges gather near the surface, freeing up their negative charges. When the droplets reach a metal strip called an electrode, these negative charges flow into a circuit, generating electricity. However, water often remains on D-TENG electrode surfaces, blocking subsequent droplets and corroding the device.

Researchers at the China Three Gorges University and the Chinese Academy of Sciences approached this problem by modifying the shape of the electrodes used in D-TENGs. They proposed that a needle rather than a strip would help droplets detach quickly, allowing charge to flow into a device that uses inexpensive components. They called this design a needle electrode droplet-based triboelectric nanogenerator, or NED-TENG.

To build the NED-TENG, the researchers prepared a plastic film using a water-repellent polymer called polytetrafluoroethylene as the negatively charged surface. They inserted a copper wire through the center of the plastic film, protruding 3 millimeters (0.1 inches) from the front side to form the needle-shaped electrode exposed to raindrops. Meanwhile, they attached copper foil to the plastic film’s backside as a second electrode, completing the circuit. The team connected both electrodes to an instrument that measures electrical performance and mounted the components on an acrylic sheet, sealing it with waterproof tape.

To simulate raindrops, the team inclined the NED-TENG at 50° from a table and dispensed tap water drop by drop from 30 centimeters (12 inches) above its plastic film. Like conventional D-TENGs, the device generated electricity as droplets slid across the film and contacted the needle electrode. However, because the water touched only a small area of the needle, it easily slid off the NED-TENG, preventing the water from building up like in D-TENGs.

The researchers then evaluated and optimized the device using 2 metrics: the force driving charges through its circuit, or voltage, and how fast its charges transfer, or current. First, they compared the NED-TENG with a conventional D-TENG. The NED-TENG generated about 564 Volts (V) and 5 milliamperes (mA) of current, nearly twice the voltage and 3 times the current of the D-TENG, and enough to power small electronics like indicator lights.

Next, they varied the droplets’ release height to maximize electricity production. They found that increasing the release height from 10 to 30 centimeters (4 to 12 inches) increased both voltage and current, peaking at about 543 V and 4 mA. At greater heights, droplets splashed hard on impact, scattering the water and disrupting the charging process they observed in sliding droplets. 

Similarly, the researchers tested different device inclination angles, ranging from 10° to 70°. Their tests revealed that the device’s electrical performance increased at steeper angles and peaked at 50°, reaching 521 V and 3 mA. At steeper angles, droplets spent less time in contact with the surface, reducing electrical output. They explained that because triboelectric materials are highly sensitive, results can vary slightly between experiments, leading to individual peak values that are lower than the highest overall outputs. 

The researchers then explored how the technology might perform in a simulated rooftop installation. To reduce power fluctuations during real-world applications, they connected multiple NED-TENGs. They observed that 10 connected devices could fill a small energy-storage component within 2 minutes and power 200 LED lights.

Overall, the NED-TENGs shed water efficiently and generated more electricity than D-TENGs, while remaining simple to build. The team noted that future upscaled studies should examine how rooftop systems can direct rainwater onto the devices at optimal heights, and how droplets interact with their surfaces to improve long-term performance. With further development, these low-cost systems could turn rooftops into practical generators powered by everyday rainfall. 

The post Needles turn rain into electricity appeared first on Sciworthy.

Carbon is the 4th most abundant element in the universe. It’s everywhere, from the air you breathe to the carbohydrates in your food to the petroleum in the Earth’s crust. Like most elements, carbon was not created by the Big Bang, but came from 2 different types of stars that fuse lighter elements together. 

Massive stars at least 8 times the Sun’s mass fuse 3 helium atoms into a carbon atom in their cores, through a mechanism called the triple-alpha process. They eventually expel this carbon into space, either through a stream of material called a stellar wind or at the end of their lives during a core-collapse supernova. 

Meanwhile, low-to-intermediate-sized stars between ½ and 8 times the Sun’s mass also induce the triple-alpha process. But unlike massive stars, they produce carbon not in their cores, but in a dense shell of helium that surrounds them during an advanced stage known as the asymptotic giant branch or AGB. AGB stars undergo cycles of swelling and contraction, during which they shed some of their material into space.

While scientists understand these processes, the contribution of each star type to the carbon supply in the universe remains uncertain. To address this, a team of scientists modeled how the chemical elements in the Milky Way Galaxy change over time with different contributions from the 2 carbon-creating processes. They then verified their findings by comparing them with the actual carbon concentration in the Milky Way.

To obtain the benchmark for the Milky Way Galaxy’s carbon content, the team turned to the catalog of stars observed by the Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment (APOGEE) survey. They selected 14,066 stars that were large and bright enough to yield reliable data but, unlike AGB and massive stars, were still at a stage of life when their newly produced carbon was still confined to their cores. The researchers used the carbon in the outer layers of these stars, known as subgiants, as a compositional record of the gas from which they formed, thereby estimating the Galaxy’s carbon content during their formation. 

The scientists started with a computer program developed by another team that models how the Milky Way’s chemistry changes over time. First, the team calculated the potential amount of carbon produced by different types of stars using estimates from earlier studies. Then, they incorporated these results into a model that accounts for how stars form, fuse elements, and release carbon into the Galaxy, using a simulation program called the Versatile Integrator for Chemical Evolution, or VICE. The researchers ran 14 versions of this model, each assuming a different contribution of carbon from AGB stars relative to massive stars.

In their computer model, the Milky Way Galaxy began as a set of 200 concentric rings, each containing its own population of stars, different speeds at which stars form, and varying amounts of gas available to form new stars. The team then stitched these rings together by having stars migrate between them. They allowed these model Galaxies to settle over 10 billion years, then picked a random sample of 14,066 simulated stars to compare their carbon content with carbon in the same number of observed subgiants from APOGEE.

The team’s model most closely reproduced the actual carbon content of the Milky Way’s subgiant stars when AGB stars contribute between 10% and 40% of the Galaxy’s carbon, with the strongest agreement occurring at 15% to 30%. Even though they found that massive stars are the dominant source of carbon, they also found that smaller AGB stars could produce carbon more efficiently than previously thought, though they take longer to become carbon sources than their larger counterparts.

The team concluded that their estimates of how much carbon comes from AGB and massive stars provide a benchmark for future studies, as the connection between the production of elements inside stars and the processes by which those same stars lose mass remains poorly understood. They suggested that future researchers analyze larger sample sizes, examine other galaxies, and use data from future surveys to better understand the chemical history of the universe.

The post Where did the galaxy get its carbon? appeared first on Sciworthy.

More than 90,000 tons of radioactive waste are stored on-site at nuclear power plants awaiting permanent disposal. Nuclear waste releases unstable forms of uranium and other elements, called radionuclides. Long-term exposure to radionuclides can cause cancer, so environmental safety regulations require that nuclear waste be made inaccessible for at least 1 million years. Thus, researchers are evaluating possible ways to store this waste permanently. 

One proposal is to store nuclear waste thousands of feet below ground in rock formations called deep geological repositories, or DGRs, to seal in radionuclides. Scientists can’t see into the future, so instead they look to the past to determine how well DRGs could work. A team of researchers from Canada recently analyzed uranium deposits that have existed for billions of years as an analog for how nuclear waste behaves deep underground.

Past researchers found that uranium deposits in ideal DGR conditions, with their protective casings intact, will stay contained for more than a billion years. However, these conditions require a stable geological environment. This team instead focused on uranium deposits in non-ideal conditions. They studied the Canadian Kiggavik uranium deposits, which occur in cracked bedrock approximately 500 meters (1,600 feet) below the surface. The team claimed these conditions are similar to DRGs with broken protective casings.

The team knew from previous work that most of the uranium minerals in the Kiggavik deposits are more than 274 million years old, but about 10% are less than 1 million years old. They found that these younger uranium minerals occurred alongside clay minerals surrounding the older uranium minerals and within open fractures. The researchers interpreted the older uranium as the source material of the younger uranium because of their proximity. They concluded that water must have infiltrated the deposits and interacted with older minerals, transporting uranium and forming new, younger minerals.

To determine the source of water infiltration, the researchers compared the chemistry of clay minerals formed alongside the younger uranium with modern snow in the Kiggavik region. They looked at the number of neutrons, or isotopes, in hydrogen atoms within the clay minerals, and found heavy values matching those of fresh water. These values indicated that snow or glacial meltwater was the source, rather than underlying bedrock or seawater. 

To determine when the water infiltrated over the last million years, the researchers used uranium-thorium dating to find when the radionuclides were mobilized. This dating method shows when uranium was removed from the original minerals by measuring how much its concentration was reduced by water infiltration. They found that the dates of these radionuclide mobilizations clustered into 5 separate water-infiltration events that occurred from 36 to 470 thousand years ago. 

Comparing these dates with existing climate records, the researchers found that the water infiltration events overlapped with periods when glaciers covered the ground surface. Normally, water can’t travel thousands of feet underground. But, like a hydraulic press, a glacier pushes water at its base downward. If the water encountered cracks in the ground, the pressure could inject it to the depth of the uranium deposit.

Next, the researchers wanted to measure how quickly radionuclides left the deposit. They measured the maximum distance between younger and older uranium minerals and used the age of the most recent water-infiltration event to estimate the fastest speed at which the radionuclides could have moved. They determined this maximum speed to be 0.0014 millimeters (0.000055 inches) per year. At that rate, they calculated it would take 360 million years for uranium radionuclides to travel 500 meters from a DGR at the same depth as the Kiggavik uranium deposits to the surface. This timescale far exceeds the necessary 1 million years for nuclear waste containment.

The team concluded that if glaciers were to return to Kiggavik, the uranium deposits wouldn’t experience substantial radionuclide movement, even in contact with glacial meltwater. Similarly, if a DGR has broken protective casings, radionuclides would be moving too slowly to reach the surface even if water leaked into it. They suggested their findings reduce constraints on viable DGR sites and could help ensure the long-term secure storage of nuclear waste.

The post Is nuclear waste safe underground? appeared first on Sciworthy.