Recently, I have been breaking into the field of alternative energies after a hiatus of a decade or so. Naturally, the field has changed a lot since I was active in it. I took it upon myself to educate my daughter, Nadiyah, on the subject as I have been educating myself on more modern techniques. I like to have conversations with my kids as I teach them about things that I think are interesting and that they might find interesting as well. So, I started our conversation with a simple question to her: How do people generate the electricity we use? (Full disclosure, we used ChatGPT extensively to help us with some of the finer points behind our discussion)

Nadiyah responded with creative answers such as windmills, water “propellers,” turbines, and lightning.

Her answers weren’t exactly a full textbook-based thesis, but I was able to use them as a surprisingly good engineering model. Wind and moving water really can create mechanical rotation. Lightning is undeniably electrical. She had already more or less identified the three essential parts of the process: an energy source, a physical process, and an electrical result.

I have never been one to replace my kids’ thoughts with memorized lists, so I decided to treat her ideas as a model to improve upon.

That decision turned what could have been a quick science discussion into something else: a lesson about energy conversion, electrical generation and systems thinking. It’s also consistent with how I mentor my kids, my students and even my direct reports: I try to take all ideas presented to me seriously.

Electricity Is Usually the Destination

One of the most important ideas we discussed is that electricity is generally not the original source of energy. It is an “energy carrier”, a useful form into which other kinds of energy are converted, transported through wires, and converted again into light, heat, sound, computation, or motion. As a 12 year old, and the daughter of scientists, Nadiyah was already familiar with atomic components, especially electrons, and therefore didn’t require a deeper dive into how flowing electrons are the electric current/electricity that we described as the “energy carrier.”

That being said, a power plant does not create energy from nothing. It changes energy from one form into another. Some energy is inevitably dispersed as waste heat, friction, electrical resistance, and the power consumed by the plant’s own equipment. As I described this to Nadiyah, and she seemed to understand these concepts without too much issue or misunderstanding.

After describing this to Nadiyah, I explained that at the point where electricity is actually produced, most generating technologies use one of two broad mechanisms:

Electromagnetic generation: Mechanical rotation changes a magnetic field around conductive wire, producing voltage and current. Wind turbines, hydroelectric plants, gas turbines, steam plants, and many engine-generators use this approach.

Photovoltaic generation: Photons transfer energy to electrons inside a semiconductor, producing electrical current without first spinning a generator.

That gave us a useful systems model that I outlined for her as:

Primary energy source → conversion process → mechanical motion or direct charge movement → conditioned electricity → useful work

Why “Water Propeller” Was a Good Answer

The device in a hydroelectric plant is called a turbine, not an ordinary propeller—but Nadiyah’s had good intuition.

A propeller typically uses rotation to push a fluid. A turbine works in the other direction: moving water, steam, or gas pushes its blades and creates rotation. Both involve closely related fluid-mechanical ideas.

In a hydroelectric plant, falling or flowing water rotates the turbine. The turbine turns a generator. Inside that generator, magnets rotate relative to coils of conductive wire. The changing magnetic field produces voltage and drives current through the wire.

This process is called electromagnetic induction. Michael Faraday demonstrated it experimentally in 1831, and it remains the foundation of most large electrical generators today. I briefly explained who Faraday was, including his experiment in 1831, but at that point, Nadiyah’s eyes started to glaze over a little. So as not to lose her interest, I quickly explained that it’s more or less how a car’s alternator works also, and she knew what that meant as I had to replace my car’s alternator fairly recently.

Solar and Mechanical Describe Different Layers

For Nadiyah, I initially divided the subject into solar and mechanical generation. That works well as a teaching framework because the two paths are easy to visualize: sunlight acting directly on a solar cell, and physical motion turning a generator.

Technically, however, they describe different levels of the system.

Solar radiation is an energy source.

Mechanical motion is usually an intermediate form of energy.

Electricity is the transportable output.

At this point, I had my own epiphany: once we separate the source from the conversion process, an interesting family tree is created, at least in regard to which sources are directly or indirectly derived from the Sun.

As sunlight heats Earth unevenly it helps create wind. Solar heating drives evaporation and the water cycle, lifting water that may later descend through a hydroelectric turbine. Plants (the green leafy kind, not the brick and mortar kind) store solar energy through photosynthesis, and fossil fuels contain chemical energy inherited from ancient life.

Wind, conventional hydropower, biomass, and fossil fuels are therefore indirect descendants of solar energy, even though most of them ultimately generate electricity mechanically. I was very excited to explain this to Nadiyah, which earned me a raised eyebrow. (Teenagers, am I right?)

This of course leads to other sources that belong to different families. Geothermal energy comes from heat within Earth. Tidal energy is primarily gravitational, driven by the Earth-Moon-Sun system. Nuclear energy comes from changes in atomic nuclei. Batteries use electrochemical reactions to move charge without first rotating a turbine. These were about the only others that I could think of, not directly or indirectly related to solar energy, beyond more esoteric forms such as the mythical “cold” and “quantum” fusions.

Fission and Fusion: Opposite Reactions, Familiar Machinery

We then discussed fission and fusion (but not cold or quantum fusion).

In fission, heavy nuclei, such as uranium, split into smaller nuclei after interacting with neutrons. The reactions release energy, radiation (generally ionizing radiation, which Nadiyah actually knew the difference), and additional neutrons that can sustain a controlled chain reaction. Modern nuclear plants use the resulting heat to make steam, which then turn a turbine-generator.

Therefore, in current nuclear plants, fission power is still derived from mechanical generation.

In fusion, however, light nuclei combine into heavier nuclei. The products have slightly less mass than the original particles, and that mass difference appears as energy according to E = mc². Growing up, I thought this equation was some sort of universal secret. Apparently it’s so popular nowadays that Nadiyah knew exactly what it was, despite me not remembering ever telling her about it. Needless to say, I explained that this is exactly what happens with the Sun and stars, they’re just big fusion reactors.

For us mortals here on earth though, a man-made fusion system must create and confine an extremely hot plasma, capture the released energy, and protect its structures from heat and radiation. Many proposed fusion plants would transfer that energy into a coolant or surrounding blanket and ultimately operate a turbine-generator. It seems like it always comes back to the turbine generator, although some newer approaches are investigating direct energy conversion.

While fission and fusion are dramatically different at the nuclear and reactor levels, the processes and workflows used are fairly similar:

Nuclear binding energy → heat → fluid motion → turbine rotation → electricity

The exotic part is the controlled nuclear reaction. The generator, however, may still rely on Faraday’s nineteenth-century principle (ie, magnetic inductance through mechanical motion to create electricity).

Could We Capture Lightning?

As with all my kids thought experiments, Nadiyah’s lightning proposal deserved a serious answer. Here, we turned to ChatGPT.

ChatGPT told us that lightning is a rapid atmospheric electrical discharge. Separated charges create an electric field strong enough to overcome air’s normal resistance to electrical flow.

According to NOAA, an average lightning bolt carries approximately 30,000 amperes of current and has an electrical potential of roughly 300 million volts, although actual flashes vary substantially.

In less technical terms, voltage describes the electrical push, while current describes how much electric charge is flowing. Lightning has enormous amounts of both—but only for a very short time, through an unpredictable path.

That is the core problem. A spectacular peak in power is not the same as a steady supply of usable energy.

A conceptual collection system would need:

Supercapacitors or specialized pulse-power equipment might absorb and stretch part of the event before transferring energy into longer-duration storage. But the engineering obstacles are severe.

Lightning is intermittent and geographically unpredictable. Its voltage can arc across or through equipment instead of following the intended path. Conductors experience extreme electromagnetic and thermal stress. Batteries cannot directly accept such short, intense pulses. Much of the energy heats and ionizes the air, produces shock waves and light, or dissipates through the ground.

A collection station would therefore require expensive equipment that sits idle most of the time and may be damaged by the event it is designed to harvest.

Conventional lightning rods reveal the practical priority: they do not store a strike. They provide a controlled path to ground so that people and structures are protected.

Capturing and conditioning part of a lightning discharge is theoretically possible. Economically and operationally, wind, solar, hydroelectric, geothermal, and nuclear systems are far more practical.

Generation Is a Systems Problem

So, our conversation began with energy sources, but ChatGPT reminded us that a reliable electrical system requires much more than a source.

For energy/power production, engineers have to manage voltage, frequency, phase, grounding, thermal limits, protection, storage, transmission, changing demand, etc. Solar installations require inverters and sometimes storage as we all know sunlight is only available for part of the day (barring north and south poles). Wind turbines require blade-pitch control (to follow wind direction and speed), power electronics, braking, and grid synchronization. Nuclear facilities require multiple layers of reactor control, cooling, monitoring, and independent protection. Hydroelectric plants manage gates, reservoirs, rotating machinery, and environmental constraints.

Efficiency alone cannot determine the “best” energy technology. Engineers must also consider capacity factor, dispatchability, geography, construction cost, fuel supply, waste, land and water use, maintainability, safety, and resilience.

A strong electrical grid combines resources with different strengths rather than relying on one supposedly perfect machine.

The Part That Mattered Most

For me, the best moment was not correcting Nadiyah when she mentioned “water propellers” instead of turbines.

It was watching Nadiyah think and learn. By recognizing motion as means of generating electrical charge, it showed me her methodology for determining the complex mechanisms behind what is a seemingly trivial question: How do people generate the electricity we use? Her thought process is exactly what engineers do when they build a useful abstraction.

A productive science conversation with a young person does not need to (and often shouldn’t) begin with the official jargon. It can begin with something like Nadiyah’s model, preserve what is physically sound, expose where categories are being mixed, and rebuild the model with clearer layers.

Nadiyah’s original division was not wrong. It was, understandably, just one layer short. In fact, I think it’s a common misconception that many adults make also, when contemplating the same questions.

For her, we described Solar as an origin. Mechanical motion was described as a conversion state. Electricity described the transportable output. Adding those layers transformed a list of machines into a system.

From a more technical perspective, curiosity supplied the components and systems thinking connected them: identify the source, follow every conversion, and ask what must be controlled before the output becomes useful.

That is the kind of exploration I wanted to share here: engineering ideas, emerging technologies, complex systems, and the moments when curiosity becomes understanding.

Website edition: This essay is also available in my engineering portfolio:

https://rainer1370.com/pages/articles/energy-generation-with-nadiyah.html

About the authors: Rob Rainer is a scientific facilities and controls leader with more than 20 years of experience spanning accelerator operations, EPICS-based control systems, automation, X-ray instrumentation, precision motion, resilient infrastructure, and data-informed engineering. Nadiyah Deo’Rainer, age 12, supplied the original observations and questions that shaped this essay. Their discussion developed as a parent-daughter mentorship exercise, with ChatGPT used to organize technical comparisons and verify explanatory details.

Sources and Further Reading

← Back to Articles