Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Tried one at a demo; you put in a ton of work for minimal wattage. Much better off with a decent power bank, honestly.
    by Mugshelf
  • > An energy loss of 42 to 67.5 percent of naturally means that it takes 42 to 67.5 percent more effort or time to power a device (say, a blender) via electricity compared to powering the same device mechanically.

    Nope. If input is 100W, loss is 60%, and resulting in output of 40W, then to increase output to 100W you don't need 60% more input (which would output 64W) you need 150% more input.

    by mmooss
  • You could attach pedals directly to motor axle and control charging power drawn precisely to ensure smooth rotation in absence of the flywheel. It could be really small.
    by scotty79
  • I'm suprised that the author didn't consider dynohubs which were also a thing in back in 2011, and are getting slightly better all the time.
    by fergie
  • Some things I would like to see are pedal controlled devices. Something like a pedal controlled wheelchair, not powered by the pedals just control the forward and back motion. My mother with sever arthritis can still pedal but has a very hard time walking. It would be a little exercise doing something that needs to be done (getting around). A pedal controlled remote control lawnmower would be nifty also.
    by tocs3
  • This arguably had some relevance in 2011. In 2026, cheap solar and batteries make human-powered static devices that would benefit from the extra power of a stationary cyclist completely redundant.
    by rgmerk
  • Might have changed their attitude since then as they posted in 2022 about a DIY guide on making a bike generator: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2022/03/how-to-build-a-pra...
    by erelong
  • Needs "2011" in the title. For example the section about friction drive hasn't been true for about a decade now
    by usrusr

Explore Birbla archives