Digg

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at cleantechnica.com

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines: The Future of Micro Wind? [w/vi

cleantechnica.com — Walking the floor of WINDPOWER 2008, the annual conference and trade show for the wind energy industry, one couldn ’t help but be transfixed by all of the different types of turbines - at least I couldn’t. The wind turbine has become the iconic symbol of clean, renewable energy. But the classic three-bladed turbine horizontal axis wind turbine, with

Bury

Kayakman 116 days ago, made popular 116 days ago

791 diggs
digg it

davidryal, on 06/21/2008, -0/+22i want one of those so bad. it's like art that pays you for letting it sit near/on your house.
- JettaMan, on 06/22/2008, -15/+2Wind turbines: the future of energy scams.
- kieranmaine, on 06/22/2008, -1/+7Why is it every positive comment is always followed by a negative comment - but one that doesn't actually try and discuss or debate the negative aspects of wind power. JettaMan - Tell us why it's a energy scam.
  - MudMan69, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4I'm sure it has something to do with socialism. It always does with him.
  - JettaMan, on 06/22/2008, -1/+1Because hydro dams and nuclear power produce energy FAR cheaper than those turbines. They are way too costly for the amount of energy they produce. Have you ever even walked up to one before? It's like a battle ship tipped on its side. Not efficient, not economical - in fact downright wasteful to produce. In a true free market setting they can not compete with other forms of energy. They rely on heavy subsidies from taxpayers extracted by lobbying, which is completely screwed up.
    - kieranmaine, on 06/23/2008, -1/+1Thanks for the reply. You didn't mention the fact that you need extra capacity anyway to deal with the unpredictable supply (although this suggests in large scale systems it might not be needed - http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/07120 ... I'm still dubious as to the cost of nuclear. The new plant in Finland is over budget and delayed.
      
      I'm all for a free market system that does away with all subsidies and puts a cost of carbon emissions. The system in Europe's been a bit dodgy to start with, but trading in carbon is far superior to subsidies where lobbyists can bribe their to the top.
      
      I think micro generation gets a bum deal. Why spend billions on a centralized power station when you could put millions of solar water heating systems on peoples roofs - these work well even in places such as the UK and are simple and proven tech. If you gave the household the money and said choose who you want the competition between companies would be massive - plus you wouldn't have corrupt, bribeable government officials making decisions.
    - JettaMan, on 06/23/2008, -1/+1Again, the energy wasted in making these costly solar panels, which barely output enough energy to run a refrigerator, doesn't make it worthwhile. Especially when it is cloudy outside or night-time.
    - kieranmaine, on 06/23/2008, -1/+1I've looked at the amount of energy a fridge/freezer uses. This one (http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/product/385700/HO ... uses 321 kWh/year, although it is A graded for energy efficiency. This wikipedia page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_water_heating#E ... - quotes a Belgian study, which says a solar water heating system costing 4500 euro will save the equivalent of 1875 kWh, against a "regular" electric boiler. This suggests that the energy saved by one of these systems is more than enough to run a few fridge/freezer. The payback for a system is estimated at 11.5 years including the government subsidy.
      
      Wikipedia goes on to say that in Australia an "average" system costing "between $1,800 and $2,800" will generate "yearly electricity savings are between $300 and $700". Not using this solution in warm countries seems stupid, while even European countries can benefit.
      
      Even if a massive program to build a large number of nuclear and hydro power stations was undertaken today, there isn't enough expertise or resources to meet all the energy demands of the world. The above solution could contribute significantly to saving money for consumers and cutting emissions, especially with the ever increasing cost of energy.
    - JettaMan, on 06/24/2008, -1/+1Ah yes, the government subsidy - you'll noticed I pointed that out two posts ago.
      
      And not enough expertise for nuclear power plants?! You know not what you say.
    - kieranmaine, on 06/24/2008, -0/+1I think I amply proved your claim that these "costly" solar panels can "barely output enough energy to run a refrigerator" is incorrect. I wasn't debating the government subsidy - I've already clarified my position on subsidies.
      
      With regarding nuclear power expertise I was talking about what I know of the UK. Most of our nuclear reactors will be built by the French, because the UK doesn't have the expertise. If I'm wrong on that I'll be more than happy to know.
ReidFleming, on 06/21/2008, -0/+5The quality ones are still expensive (prohibitively so for most of us) but as demand broadens, I'm sure we'll see prices drop. Maybe, one day, the sight of them on U.S. houses will be as ubiquitous as the solar water warmers on the rooftops of southern Europe.
MeredithM, on 06/21/2008, -3/+9a personal wind turbine that doesn't harm birds? sign me up!
- GrandmasterB, on 06/21/2008, -4/+36If a bird flies into a wind turbine...that's natural selection. Survival of the fittest.
  - iharbinger, on 06/22/2008, -1/+7why did someone digg you down for that? Perfectly good statement.
- cap11235, on 06/21/2008, -1/+4Why? Do you not like poultry?
- griff36, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10clean windows kill more birds a year than windmills
indian24, on 06/21/2008, -2/+7Alternative energy FTW
DimensionalPunk, on 06/21/2008, -0/+14Didn't Kevin Costner have one of those things on his boat in Waterworld?
- bar10dr, on 06/21/2008, -0/+7Science fiction is always one step ahead
- LanceUppercut, on 06/21/2008, -8/+4I wouldn't know, like most americans, I never watched the movie.
  
  Zing!
  - MindTrigger, on 06/22/2008, -0/+11You don't get to Zing your own comment, bud.
    - endlessoul, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2Yeah, that's what I was going to say.
      
      Zinging is done by someone replying only.
      
      That's like giving yourself a pat on the back, man.
areohbe, on 06/21/2008, -0/+5these have been around forever... we have a farmer down the road with one made of 40 gallon barrel halves... he's had it for at least 22 years
- pentalive, on 06/22/2008, -1/+0There is a building visible from Highway 101 just north of San Francisco with two tiers of 55 gallon drums I think they rotate in opposite directions too.
  
  Too bad the utility company will only let you break even. They say "If you are generating more than you use when we don't need it why should we buy it from you?" Hey PG&E (and others) here's an idea, when all of us are generating above need, use the extra to electrolyze water into hydrogen - then burn the hydrogen to make electricity when you need it.
  - elnerdo, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4... I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but that's an awful idea. The equipment to store the hydrogen and do the electrolysis would cost more money than they would ever get from using that system. Past that, despite what 'cool' and 'green' magazines have told you, hydrogen's not really a very good way to store energy, especially on a large scale. It would make more sense to just pump water up a hill with the extra electricity (allowing it to run back down through a turbine when needed), but even that would be prohibitively expensive and not-very-useful.
    - pentalive, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0Anything to store the extra energy we all would create.
      
      My brother in law has a PV array in his back yard, he has a huge back yard and could probably easily double the size of the array - but why spend the money? Getting 'PG&E' to pay for every Kilowatt/hour you create and storing the energy for later use is the point.
      
      If the utility did make hydrogen we could use it in our fuelcell cars..
  - bjterry, on 06/22/2008, -0/+0I believe that in California you can have net metering installed by law.
    - pentalive, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0Yes, but the best you can do is break even. If your home uses 200kw/h and you generate 400kw/h you get free electricity but you give the other 200 kw/h to the utility free.
      
      Most people shoot for replacing 80% of their normal usage.
- lostlyrics, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1http://www.solarserver.de/lexikon/aufwindkraftwerk ...
  
  in africa you find a ruin, decades old ...
  when the men in black with cases full
  of 'aid' corrupted the wrong black men.
  
  and the patent jungle is not really helpful either
  http://www.patent-de.com/20040219/DE10234568A1.htm ...
Ramble, on 06/21/2008, -2/+7What? These have existed for years and years. They're nothing new.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/22/2008, -2/+1That's exactly what I thought.
  
  I remember hearing about how revolutionary they were going to be back in ~2004.
- SpyDerMann, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3I think that the article is about better and more efficient designs rather than the basic "vertical axis" concept. Just like 2008 extreme sport bikes are much better and more resistant than the ones made at the beginning of the 20th century.
  - Rylinkus, on 06/22/2008, -2/+1The problem with that is, while they're better than older vertical axis windmills, they are not better than horizontal windmills. And they get marketed as new technology all across the net. They are clearly not.
Hrodrik, on 06/21/2008, -0/+7Another good alternative.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9945005-54.html
- jabberwolf, on 06/22/2008, -1/+1Nice but this has been tried before and still never pans out.
  I mean granted it works, but the hood that is placed around the turbine is not cost effective on its returns.
  
  There have been a few companies that have promised such high returns but never delivered.
  Vortec Energy in New Zealand was one of them.
MrDo, on 06/21/2008, -4/+18I just made my own micro wind.
cfrog7, on 06/22/2008, -0/+7These have been around for a time but they're definitely getting better, more affordable, more efficient, and safer.
The most promising company I've seen is Quiet Revolution in the UK
http://quietrevolution.co.uk/
- kieranmaine, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2These do look pretty good, but the price of them seems prohibitive. Maybe the larger models they're designing will cut down costs.
atarijedi, on 06/22/2008, -5/+4These also have a much lower efficiency than horizontal axis turbines. Birds will just have to learn to move out of the way!
- someguy92, on 06/22/2008, -2/+3RTFA
  "Other advantages of vertical-axis turbines:
  
  * Can produce up to 50% more electricity per year than conventional turbines with the same swept area
  * Generate electricity at much lower wind speeds, as low as 4 mph (1.5 m/s)
  * Will continue to generate power in high wind speeds, up to 130 mph (60m/s) depending on the mode
  * Direct-drive units have no gearbox. No gearbox means a more efficient transfer of energy and no leaking oil
  * Will not harm wildlife, in terms of bird and bat strikes"
  - elnerdo, on 06/22/2008, -1/+11The vertical ones are more efficient ONLY per square foot of space used, but that's just because their axis is horizontal, not vertical. The horizontal axis ones are more efficient per dollar, and more efficient per material used.
  - Tarnum, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3They have better MTBF too, because of the fewer moving parts, in some cases just one rotor/turbine. I guess you can run them for years with very little maintenance, like the water turbines.
  - Rylinkus, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2I don't mean to be argumentative, but everything I've read has said the opposite. That the efficiency of horizontal windmills are nearly double that of vertical options. Mostly due to power generation being more a high RPM process and VAWTS simply have a low TSR. Now, of course both are getting better. And the VAWTs tend to be more bird friendly. But alot of the VAWT advantages that end up being listed almost seem like they're simply fabricated. Seems like a lot of companies advertise them as "new and more efficient" than traditional windmills. When they've been around for years.
- dpl_, on 06/22/2008, -0/+5Vertical axis turbines aren't going to be replacing horizontal axis turbines anytime soon when it comes to large scale power generation because they are definitely less efficient. The real advantage with verticals would be for small-scale personal use in urban environments.
  - Rylinkus, on 06/22/2008, -1/+1And coming from a business standpoint, they're a bit more marketable as they seem like new and innovative technology that simply must be better. And the helical ones "look cool". Don't ask how I know.......
FDenD, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3I'll take any renewal energy that's good for the environment.
jabberwolf, on 06/22/2008, -2/+2I've seen these out near Palm Springs California a long time ago.

They only seemed to be more efficient (at collecting energy) at high wind speeds.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4Care to explain how you can divine the efficiency of a wind turbine through casual observation from a distance?
londubh, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10VAWT's can only harvest about 60% the amount of energy a HAWT can. Google it.But it can collect it over a wider range of wind speeds. So most wind energy will be collected via HAWT but the VAWT's can be used in a lot of other places that the HAWT can't. So yes VAWT's are better suited for some micro wind applications.
- DifferentAngle, on 06/22/2008, -2/+1WAWT???
chall2001, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2While I agree that a vertical turbine is better than nothing the author incorrectly implies that its more efficient than horizontal types. All the testing clearly shows the horizontals have significantly higher power. Why do you think all the major commercial installs use HAWT?

Also, there hasn't been any conclusive test that a VAWT is any less dangerous to birds than a HAWT of equal power.
imightbewrong, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1i saw a show on the science channel about some guy who invented a wind mill like these ones except it was used sideways
nightwing2000, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1What's needed is an efficient way to store energy - hareest for future use. Batteries are not quite there yet. Various batteries have assorted technical drawbacks.

My ideal design is a superconducting ring - pump energy in as it is generated, extract as needed. The main drawback - your liquid nitrogen evaporates or you forget to fill it, and poof - a megawatt returns to the environment in an instant as the ring stops superconducting...

Lower tech solutons include:
creating hydrogen - a fuel cell would be a nice energy recovery extractor. You need a big pressure tank!
Alternatively, use the pressure tank for compressed air? How efficient?
Carbon fiber or kevlar flywheels with magnetic bearings in a vacuum container (Energy is proportional to rotational velocity squared, so choose tolerance for high speed over mass)
if the logistics permit, even pumping water up into an old water tank would be low tech but useful.

If you have the generating capacity to waste, even an inefficient solution would work. Once the capital costs are spent, any energy that can be produced is simply a freebie.

The nice thing about vertical turbines is that the axis can be secured with guy wires, meaning the structure itself does not need to be as rigid and self-supporting. The forces on a turnable horizontal-axis windmill would be substantial, so that centre post must be pretty solid - and cannot have angled supports if the blade axis can rotate any direction.
- woodrail, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1flywheels
  
  generator/motor rotor on magnetic bearings in a vacuum spinning at 20000 rpm or something. Very efficient.
  
  Not good for vehicles I understand, but superawesome otherwise.
  
  edit: oops, neverrrmind
- kaffeinekiwi, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1Pump water uphill with surplus power, to a dam. Regenerate the power with the hydro dam as needed. Inefficient, but low tech, and has been in use for a while. Unfortunately you need the right geography.
Berkana, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2The linked turbine is a savonius/darrieus hybrid. I prefer a helical savonius configuration for micro wind:
http://www.helixwind.com/en/
http://www.windside.com/

The savonius turbine portion is self starting, and produces less noise than the darrieus vertical axis wind turbine. Making the turbine helical ensures a very stable torque curve.
TwinTurboMike, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2Im just going to install a merry-go-round in my front yard and invite all the neighbor kids over to play. There's more energy stored in a dozen 9 year olds than...
austingreenguy, on 06/22/2008, -0/+0I covered this show for my Green energy news portal / Blog
Go here

http://mattgoesgreen.com/category/windpower-2008-c ...

Lots of photos from the show , he is correct many new turbine designs on display, I also posted a few live interview from the show to this site.
The Broadstar Aerocam turbine was my favorite product at the show, simple design but elegant.

-Enjoy
-Matt
happyseamonster, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2I read on Jizmodo that if there are too many windmills, it could reverse the spin of the earth.
carlosos, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1Awesome, I always thought that there should be more than 24 hours in a day. We just have to watch out that we don't install too many or otherwise the days might get shorter again...
britoca, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1bird killer
TheImaginator, on 06/27/2008, -0/+1Also found a link to another vertical wind turbine from another person's digg submission;
http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1112/86/
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines: The Future of Micro Wind? [w/vi

Login or register to add a comment