NEW! Members Only Forums!

Access more articles, news & discussion by becoming a PeakOil.com Member.
Register Today...
It's FREE!


Login



Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins :-)


THE Wind Power Thread pt 2 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby KingM » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 15:31:54

You see this sort of thing all the time. Not saying that it won't work, but most alternatives never amount to anything. Once again, I'll believe it when they start selling this thing in large quantities. Until then, it's a scientific curiosity.
KingM
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue 30 Aug 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Second Vermont Republic

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 15:52:01

KingM wrote:You see this sort of thing all the time. Not saying that it won't work, but most alternatives never amount to anything. Once again, I'll believe it when they start selling this thing in large quantities. Until then, it's a scientific curiosity.

The guy who invented/designed this thing seems to have a good track record. And his intention was to make something simple and inexpensive for under-developed parts of the world. It may never power your electric car but it might make for a few hours of light or radio in a village high in the Himalayas.
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby gnm » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 16:21:51

I think the orientation of the band might be a real problem. Getting the flow to hit it correctly that is. Could be useful along roof peaks and such where large mechanical interference already orients the flow however...

-G
I Have and will continue to vote against ANY politician who supports the various bailouts. Curse you for selling out our future for status quo now!
User avatar
gnm
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3219
Joined: Thu 08 Jul 2004, 02:00:00
Location: plundering eco-villages

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 17:14:35

HydroLuver wrote:
gnm wrote:I think the orientation of the band might be a real problem. Getting the flow to hit it correctly that is. Could be useful along roof peaks and such where large mechanical interference already orients the flow however.
I am sure some clever engineer can design it to swivel to catch the most wind possible based on direction of the wind.

I'm not a clever engineer and I can see an easy solution. Pivot the frame, top and bottom, and stick a rigid vane on the top. That will cause the frame to face the wind. Just like wind gens do.

One problem that I've read with this device is that the mylar 'ribbon' might not be long lasting. That's not a big deal on a small scale (think small village in Booneyland). As long as the ribbons are cheap then someone can switch them out. Might be harder to do on your roof. (Sure as hell would be on mine.)
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby mos6507 » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 17:48:39

It does look like the ribbon won't work well if gets wet or loses elasticity.
User avatar
mos6507
Master
Master
 
Posts: 9505
Joined: Fri 03 Aug 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Boston Suburbs

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 19:15:47

mos6507 wrote:It does look like the ribbon won't work well if gets wet or loses elasticity.

Mylar? Wet? Might loose its elasticity, might stretch over time. If so, tighten or replace. This is low, low tech. Designed to be maintained by just about anyone.
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby JRP3 » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 20:19:51

I'd like to see a demo in actual wind. I wonder if a fan might cause larger vibration since it puts out pulses of air and not a steady breeze?
User avatar
JRP3
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon 23 Oct 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 20:28:30

JRP3 wrote:I'd like to see a demo in actual wind. I wonder if a fan might cause larger vibration since it puts out pulses of air and not a steady breeze?

They does? And here I am, thinking that the blades go 'round and 'round. Who knew they jerked? :(
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby JRP3 » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 20:59:28

BobWallace wrote:They does? And here I am, thinking that the blades go 'round and 'round. Who knew they jerked? :(

Well hold your finger against fan blades, you feel vibrations right? Because it's not a continuous surface, therefore pulses. I don't know if it would make a difference, but it might.
User avatar
JRP3
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon 23 Oct 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 22:24:40

JRP3 wrote:
BobWallace wrote:
JRP3 wrote:I'd like to see a demo in actual wind. I wonder if a fan might cause larger vibration since it puts out pulses of air and not a steady breeze?


They does?

And here I am, thinking that the blades go 'round and 'round.

Who knew they jerked?

:(

Well hold your finger against fan blades, you feel vibrations right? Because it's not a continuous surface, therefore pulses. I don't know if it would make a difference, but it might.


I suppose you mean "hold your finger really close". Holding your finger against fan blades, well, you'll feel something all right. ;o)

I suspect that what one would feel by holding their finger close to the blade is a higher pressure area coming from the blade area close to ones finger. Get a bit away and the pressure will have dissipated, I suspect.

I'd be surprised if there was some sort of intact burst of energy a distance from the fan.

Non-the-less, you might be correct.

That said, don't you think this guy has done some 'real world' tests and not relied on just fans? Wasn't he most likely just making a quick demo and it was easier to turn on a fan than to turn on the wind....
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby JRP3 » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 22:46:58

BobWallace wrote:That said, don't you think this guy has done some 'real world' tests and not relied on just fans? Wasn't he most likely just making a quick demo and it was easier to turn on a fan than to turn on the wind....

Yes, of course, I'm simply verrrryyyy skeptical of any new technology and was just turning a critical eye on the demo.
Other possible critiques, I think conventional turbines can be setup to generate at 10mi/hr as well, and there are also very low friction ceramic bearings available.
So I'd like to see a side by side real world comparison between this and a conventional windmill, with a cost comparison. Then I might be satisfied. :P
User avatar
JRP3
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon 23 Oct 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 23:48:47

I think the big advantage with this device is its cost.

Bearings, especially low friction bearings, are expensive IIRC.

Usable turbines, ones that produce power at lower mph are in the neighborhood of $2k+. At least the ones that I've found.

(I'm sort of in the market. Wind gen + tower + odds and ends would run me ~$6k. Wind gen, more PV, or just keep burning some diesel....)
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby jbeckton » Wed 24 Oct 2007, 06:55:53

HydroLuver wrote:One of the key negatives for getting wind energy for homes owners is the problem of large wind turbines in a dense residential area. NIMBYism will block that.


I can see this making a lot of noise which will hinder its acceptance into the residential area.
User avatar
jbeckton
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri 05 Jan 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby aahala » Wed 24 Oct 2007, 10:25:51

The invention is an interesting gimmick but that's all it is, relative
to energy production.

Bringing some of you back down to earth, 40 milliwatts is
40 thousandths of a watt. To run an ordinary 40-watt bulb, you
would need 1,000 of them, and that assumes all would actually
work at the maximum claimed level all at once.

Where(and when) can we buy 1,000 of them? Or for that matter
one of them?

I will leave it to someone else to calculate the cost of providing one
megawatt of power and compare it to existing costs of plant
construction. How much land to be required to have a 1-meg
plant? Half my county??
User avatar
aahala
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Wed 24 Oct 2007, 11:25:15

If you were to actually read the text ...
Working in Haiti, Shawn Frayne, a 28-year-old inventor based in Mountain View, Calif., saw the need for small-scale wind power to juice LED lamps and radios in the homes of the poor. Conventional wind turbines don’t scale down well—there’s too much friction in the gearbox and other components. “With rotary power, there’s nothing out there that generates under 50 watts,” Frayne says. So he took a new tack, studying the way vibrations caused by the wind led to the collapse in 1940 of Washington’s Tacoma Narrows Bridge (aka Galloping Gertie).

Frayne’s device, which he calls a Windbelt, is a taut membrane fitted with a pair of magnets that oscillate between metal coils. Prototypes have generated 40 milliwatts in 10-mph slivers of wind, making his device 10 to 30 times as efficient as the best microturbines. Frayne envisions the Windbelt costing a few dollars and replacing kerosene lamps in Haitian homes. “Kerosene is smoky and it’s a fire hazard,” says Peter Haas, founder of the Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group, which helps people in developing countries to get environmentally sound access to clean water, sanitation and energy. “If Shawn’s innovation breaks, locals can fix it. If a solar panel breaks, the family is out a panel.”

Did you notice that word "prototype"? Did you notice that no one suggested powering New York City with these?
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby jbeckton » Wed 24 Oct 2007, 12:10:10

BobWallace wrote:Did you notice that word "prototype"?

Did you notice that no one suggested powering New York City with these?


I think sometimes that people are just inclined to use total consumption as a measuring stick for these kinds of prototypes the live up to, which is unfair. I see the future energy portfolio being much more diversified than what we see today.

Can solar, or wind, or geothermal, or biomass, or tidal, or wave energy completely power the nation-NO.

But there is a good chance that solar/wind/geothermal/biomass/tidal/wave ect... can.

I still think that we will need to rely on nuclear power to provide a base load for quite some time.
User avatar
jbeckton
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri 05 Jan 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby evilgenius » Wed 24 Oct 2007, 17:09:09

Combine that thinking with tidal forces and you will have something as well. As for needing very many of them, how many roadsides are there? You know, some experiments with materials and sizing, with using magnetic ribbons instead of magnets on ribbons and varying the harmonics and maybe the efficiency could be greatly increased.

Again, this kind of thing comes down to storing the energy for future use, not what you can use right off of the device.
User avatar
evilgenius
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1524
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Stopped at the border.

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby aahala » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 10:26:39

BobWallace wrote:If you were to actually read the text ... Did you notice that word "prototype"? Did you notice that no one suggested powering New York City with these?

I did read the text, looked for additional articles online, which were very much the same, and also went to original source, the printed copy of Popular Mechanics, the November 2007 edition. There wasn't much additional info, if any. The article is on the top half of page 80, above the article about the responsive arm.
User avatar
aahala
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby BobWallace » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 12:31:06

jbeckton wrote:Can solar, or wind, or geothermal, or biomass, or tidal, or wave energy completely power the nation-NO.But there is a good chance that solar/wind/geothermal/biomass/tidal/wave ect... can. I still think that we will need to rely on nuclear power to provide a base load for quite some time.

Do you mean can they power the nation right now? If so, of course not. We haven't installed enough. Can they in the future? I think so.
Will we need to use the nuclear power that we have right now and possibly build a bit more to help us through the transition? I think so. But hopefully we will remove nuclear from the mix when we can. It's nasty in so many ways....
User avatar
BobWallace
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Turbine Free Wind Power: 10x more efficient

Unread postby jbeckton » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 13:06:38

BobWallace wrote:
jbeckton wrote:Can solar, or wind, or geothermal, or biomass, or tidal, or wave energy completely power the nation-NO. But there is a good chance that solar/wind/geothermal/biomass/tidal/wave ect... can. I still think that we will need to rely on nuclear power to provide a base load for quite some time.
Do you mean can they power the nation right now? If so, of course not. We haven't installed enough. Can they in the future? I think so.

My point was that none of them alone can power the entire nation, but a combination of them could. Hence, any technology that has an application, even if it is a niche application, is important to the big picture.
User avatar
jbeckton
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri 05 Jan 2007, 03:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests