“If all its energy could be captured, an average lightning bolt would provide about 5 billion joules, equivalent to 0.85 barrels of oil. But there are problems capturing all of this, not least that the electrical energy arrives sporadically in time and place. It also delivers extremely high power, which makes capturing the energy problematic as any conductors must be able to carry high power without suffering damage – melting at high temperatures, for example. The second problem is that when lightning strikes earth, much of the energy arrives not as electricity but as heat. This cannot be harvested directly as electricity can and could also damage equipment. Once captured, the energy would have to be stored and released when needed, as is done with renewable energies such as wind and solar power. This adds extra planning and expense to the exercise, but it is possible. On smaller scales, such storage has been achieved with capacitors. On larger scales – in power stations, for instance – it is done with large rechargeable batteries, liquefying air or pumping water into hilltop reservoirs above hydroelectric power stations. Capturing the energy in a lightning bolt has been achieved on small scales in labs, although the technology has not successfully scaled up. The main approach investigated is conducting electricity via rods and towers. Although a kite could function in a similar fashion, it may not be able to bear the weight of the conductor. Another approach would be to use the energy to heat water and use this in turn to generate electricity, but this would be less efficient. As to whether lightning strikes anywhere consistently enough to make it a viable power source, the best location is in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, near Kifuka. Here, every year about 158 strikes take place per square kilometre. If all of the energy from these strikes was captured with 100 per cent efficiency over an area of 5 square kilometres, it would supply only 236 average UK homes.” “The Empire State Building in New York City is struck about 23 times a year. If this energy could all be collected, it would be equivalent to about 20 barrels of oil. Although this is a very small amount of energy, if similar amounts could be harvested by all tall buildings, it might be a useful contributor to their own power demands, in much the same way as solar panels and wind turbines.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/statoil/2015/01/28/can-we-harvest-lightning-for-the-power-grid/#14cb92491e6c
While capturing the energy in a lightning strike sounds both impressive and a worthy goal for research, it should be recognised that according to existing theory, the energy in the lightning comes from forced separation of electrically charged ions in thunder clouds, driven by the updraft of air. So what you have is really a way of harvesting highly concentrated wind energy, under extremely unfriendly conditions. Surely it's easier just to use wind turbines operating in more benign environments?
However, if the current theory of lightning formation is incorrect, and the energy of lightning comes from other sources like cosmic rays, then all bets are off!
The lightening strike is like a hell in the sky. It is a breakdown discharge in the air by a very high electrostatic voltage between clouds.This is a state of an extreme electricity condition. To exploit the energy such lightening strikes will be very technologically demanding. It will be like that you control a hell!!
I believe it may be one day possible for the humans.
Best wishes
- Badges
- Science topic