Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Wind power.
Following on from Flob's Q....
There appears to be resistance to wind mills due to noise and sight. So why do they have to be so big??
A standard half size one could be mass produced that would cut the cost down and planted on long poles above the treeline of timber forests and other suitable places.
There appears to be resistance to wind mills due to noise and sight. So why do they have to be so big??
A standard half size one could be mass produced that would cut the cost down and planted on long poles above the treeline of timber forests and other suitable places.
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by wildwood. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Currently 2MwH is the minimum economic size and also re TLCA (total life cylce analysis - where one looks at cost/benefits from life to death). As I understand it we can't get much more efficent on the turbine's ability to generate because of the laws of thermodynamics. I am happy to stand corrected. A smaller one, period is not efficient, and by the time we hit microturbines they are crap and only a feel good factor for backing out one's electricity bill.
Of interest, I am yet to see the economics for spinning chimneys and also spinning tube generators that go down the line of the roof (and can orient to the wind) These are, I understand, reasonably efficient for their cost and offer a small contribution.
The future before the H2 economy is tidal and wave.............
Of interest, I am yet to see the economics for spinning chimneys and also spinning tube generators that go down the line of the roof (and can orient to the wind) These are, I understand, reasonably efficient for their cost and offer a small contribution.
The future before the H2 economy is tidal and wave.............
The trouble with nuclear Toureman is that it is incredibly expensive if you have to pick up the decomissioning costs.
Recent Governments have refused to do this anymore isisting that private industry do so - they're not daft either and so a nuclear impasse has developed.
No more nuclear powerstations will be built in the UK until someone backs down.
DTcrosswordfan's dead right about the economics of wind power, you have to get large to get the economies of scale.
The biggest problem though and it's common to almost all renewables is that you can't controll it.
It is claimed many wind farms run at less than 10% capacity for a third of the time
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12985410
That's contested but the problem is still there - you can't whistle up a wind when you need more power on the grid and options for storing electricity are very limited.
Recent Governments have refused to do this anymore isisting that private industry do so - they're not daft either and so a nuclear impasse has developed.
No more nuclear powerstations will be built in the UK until someone backs down.
DTcrosswordfan's dead right about the economics of wind power, you have to get large to get the economies of scale.
The biggest problem though and it's common to almost all renewables is that you can't controll it.
It is claimed many wind farms run at less than 10% capacity for a third of the time
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12985410
That's contested but the problem is still there - you can't whistle up a wind when you need more power on the grid and options for storing electricity are very limited.
WildWood //Long poles above the treeline and other suitable places//
That is defnitely NOT a suitable place for a wind turbine.
DTcrosswordfan // A smaller one is not efficient.//
Wrong. Smalll turbines can be quite efficient. It is simply a matter of the economy of scale as it is in any machine. A large machine is cheaper to build for its capacity.
So what if they run at low capacity for a third of the time? They still p1ss on anything else in terms of real costs. Coal fired power stations are only economic because their immense pollution is not factored into the cost.
Nuclear fission is an economic disaster. The loss land where they are built and the cost to guard the spent full for tens of thousands of years make them the most expensive power source ever conceived. No safe economic means of disposal had ever been found.
That is defnitely NOT a suitable place for a wind turbine.
DTcrosswordfan // A smaller one is not efficient.//
Wrong. Smalll turbines can be quite efficient. It is simply a matter of the economy of scale as it is in any machine. A large machine is cheaper to build for its capacity.
So what if they run at low capacity for a third of the time? They still p1ss on anything else in terms of real costs. Coal fired power stations are only economic because their immense pollution is not factored into the cost.
Nuclear fission is an economic disaster. The loss land where they are built and the cost to guard the spent full for tens of thousands of years make them the most expensive power source ever conceived. No safe economic means of disposal had ever been found.
I'm not sure that efficiency is quite the issue here.
It's more to do with the practicality.
Yes it's all well and good as a top up source but you couldn't disconnect from the grid and run your house on a wind turbine.
If we suddenly couldn't use fossil fuels anymore nuclear would have to be the mainstay of the generation.
We couldn't run the country's energy requirements on renewables today even if you had an infinite budget and planning permission for wind and wave.
And the only thing that will change that is a new technology for efficient energy storage
It's more to do with the practicality.
Yes it's all well and good as a top up source but you couldn't disconnect from the grid and run your house on a wind turbine.
If we suddenly couldn't use fossil fuels anymore nuclear would have to be the mainstay of the generation.
We couldn't run the country's energy requirements on renewables today even if you had an infinite budget and planning permission for wind and wave.
And the only thing that will change that is a new technology for efficient energy storage
However people argue round the matter at the moment, nuclear fission is the only feasible way to supply the vast amounts of power we will need in the future -especially when electric cars are improved enough to become common.
Renewables, including the silly windmills, are reckoned eventually to supply 30% of our needs, a figure often derided as hopelessly optimistic. Even if true, that still leaves 70% to come from power stations, which leaves us the choice between fossil fuels and nuclear.
The EU could do something useful for once by forming a consortium of countries to find a deserted island, probably in Scandanavia, and work together to build a vast underground waste storage facility. This could be going on while the new generation of nuclear stations is being built.
Nuclear it will be but, as jake says, only when politicians stop wringing their hands and wetting their knickers and find some courage. (My words, not his!)
Renewables, including the silly windmills, are reckoned eventually to supply 30% of our needs, a figure often derided as hopelessly optimistic. Even if true, that still leaves 70% to come from power stations, which leaves us the choice between fossil fuels and nuclear.
The EU could do something useful for once by forming a consortium of countries to find a deserted island, probably in Scandanavia, and work together to build a vast underground waste storage facility. This could be going on while the new generation of nuclear stations is being built.
Nuclear it will be but, as jake says, only when politicians stop wringing their hands and wetting their knickers and find some courage. (My words, not his!)
Actually, the technology for running ones home directly from a wind turbine has been around (at least here in the U.S.) since the late 1920's.
At that time several manufacturer's produced and sold a "windmill". Appearance wise it was indistinguishable from the ubiquitous windmills seen throughout the western U.S. prairies used to draw water. However, these were equipped with a fairly small 12 volt DC generator... not a whole lot larger than the ones on automobiles before the advent of the alternator.
A steady supply of wind was never much of a problem (hence the majority of new wind turbine "farms" today are built int he western U.S.) but the storage of the electricity was. So, underneath the windmill (about 30 feet high) was a small building holding an array of truck or heavy machinery batteries. This actually was the most costly part of the system. The windmill produced 12 volt electricity which was stored in the battery system. Many suppliers sold household appliances, such as small refrigerators, iron for ironing clothes, radios, toasters and others that operated on 12 volts. Many were produced by Crosley Company that also sold a small automobile (non-electric).
At any rate, the more things change, the more they stay the same, no?
At that time several manufacturer's produced and sold a "windmill". Appearance wise it was indistinguishable from the ubiquitous windmills seen throughout the western U.S. prairies used to draw water. However, these were equipped with a fairly small 12 volt DC generator... not a whole lot larger than the ones on automobiles before the advent of the alternator.
A steady supply of wind was never much of a problem (hence the majority of new wind turbine "farms" today are built int he western U.S.) but the storage of the electricity was. So, underneath the windmill (about 30 feet high) was a small building holding an array of truck or heavy machinery batteries. This actually was the most costly part of the system. The windmill produced 12 volt electricity which was stored in the battery system. Many suppliers sold household appliances, such as small refrigerators, iron for ironing clothes, radios, toasters and others that operated on 12 volts. Many were produced by Crosley Company that also sold a small automobile (non-electric).
At any rate, the more things change, the more they stay the same, no?
I have direct experience of wind turbines since I once worked on and in some 1.6MW turbines in Germany. I can assure you that they are not noisy enough to be heard (above the sound of the wind that is driving them) more than about 50 metres away. When it is quiet they don't turn. When energy becomes almost unaffordable we will be glad we built them when we could afford to do so.
I worked in the renewable energy industry for many years and several of them specifically in small wind turbine design.
I know of no electric wind turbines that looked like a wind pumping turbine. Wind pumps use a high solidity rotor with many blades and turn at a slow speed. Electric turbines used two three or four slender blades and turned very quickly.
Two of the best known brands in the USA were Wincharger and Jacobs. Jacobs made machines up to 3KW. They generally charged 32 volt batteries because the current would be very high at 12 volts requiring very large transmission cables.
I used to have a 32 volt system with an Australian made Dunlite 1KW turbine. Later we changed to the more typical 24 volt system. This is currently charged by a 1.5KW solar array and provides virtually all of our electricity needs.
I also co-designed and built a 5KW turbine which produced insane quantities of power. We used to heat the house with the excess energy in winter. However it is in need of repairs.
I know of no electric wind turbines that looked like a wind pumping turbine. Wind pumps use a high solidity rotor with many blades and turn at a slow speed. Electric turbines used two three or four slender blades and turned very quickly.
Two of the best known brands in the USA were Wincharger and Jacobs. Jacobs made machines up to 3KW. They generally charged 32 volt batteries because the current would be very high at 12 volts requiring very large transmission cables.
I used to have a 32 volt system with an Australian made Dunlite 1KW turbine. Later we changed to the more typical 24 volt system. This is currently charged by a 1.5KW solar array and provides virtually all of our electricity needs.
I also co-designed and built a 5KW turbine which produced insane quantities of power. We used to heat the house with the excess energy in winter. However it is in need of repairs.
Chakka35 //The EU could do something useful for once by forming a consortium of countries to find a deserted island, probably in Scandanavia, and work together to build a vast underground waste storage facility. //
This suggestion shows a typical naivety about the issues involved in storing nuclear waste. Such a location would be extremely unsuitable for something that must be retained for a geologically significant period of time.
This suggestion shows a typical naivety about the issues involved in storing nuclear waste. Such a location would be extremely unsuitable for something that must be retained for a geologically significant period of time.
Chakka // Renewables, including the silly windmills, are reckoned eventually to supply 30% of our needs, a figure often derided as hopelessly optimistic. //
Derided as hopelessly optimistic by those with a vested interest in the status quo and the suckers who swallow and help spread their propaganda. I have seen many attempts to "prove" that wind turbines and solar are uneconomic but they use dodgey assumptions and fail to take the real cost of coal and nuclear power into comparison.
Derided as hopelessly optimistic by those with a vested interest in the status quo and the suckers who swallow and help spread their propaganda. I have seen many attempts to "prove" that wind turbines and solar are uneconomic but they use dodgey assumptions and fail to take the real cost of coal and nuclear power into comparison.
-- answer removed --
1 to 17 of 17
Latest Posts
ChatterBank1 min ago
Is There Any Good Reason Why This...
News2 mins ago
Crime Cases Still Using Cassettes
Technology8 mins ago
Religion & Spirituality - What...
ChatterBank13 mins ago
Tory Donor Lord Bamford Funds The Reform...
News15 mins ago
