answered question
0
Votes
Votes
6
Answers
Answers
M$1.00
Are windmills and wind turbines an effective source of electricity for your home?
I'm getting a little green crazy and I've been wondering if it's possible to put up windmills/wind turbines in my home. Even if the turbines did something really simple like powered a battery pack for the lights around the house that would do something.... right?
Or are wind turbines not worth the carbon footprint they cost to create them?
Or are wind turbines not worth the carbon footprint they cost to create them?
answers (6)
I believe WIND Power is as viable as solar power, presently. Wind technology is advancing & improving quickly. The propeller type turbines seem to be better suited for more remote wind farms-- not so much for more urban settings. But turbine type and technology is CHANGING RAPIDLY. (See videos below.)
The biggest obstacle to wind power in more dense, urban areas is :
a) building and zoning codes that never anticipated turbines (and solar)
b) mis information based on OLD TECHNOLOGY (e.g. false info re: height requirements, maintenance, propeller noise, code barriers, etc.
c) running the "extension cord" from the remote wind (or solar) farm to the main power grid. It's not the technology cost, its the connection cost to the power grid from remote wind/solar farm locations. That suggests how we locate and think about wind turbines MUST change.
There are vertical wind axis turbines and horizontal wind turbines that are showing great promise that don't require being 30 ft in the air (like propeller turbines). The idea that all/most turbines in cities need to be placed "above the trees and roof tops" is just FALSE. Obviously there are micro climates-- partially even created by built structures. You can have 30 mph wind gusts in some areas at 6 ft off the ground (like in my Chicago neighborhood RIGHT NOW!)
Aerotecture Turbines (Chicago) is an American company that has horizontally placed turbines.
http://www.aerotecture.com/projects_mlh.html
See the Aerotecture Website for Photos not shown here of the Mercy Lakefront SRO Turbine project.
There is ALSO an interesting new vertical axis turbine that has none of the bearing/maintenance problems (supposedly) that the other propeller & vertical axis turbines that Cyrusrus refers to in the post above. They are called MAGLev (Magnetic) Wind Turbines. http://magturbine.com/
Engadget & Jay Leno's Garage both have good explanations of how these magnetic turbines are better than the ball bearing, mechanical turbines. (The MagLev manf has a lousy web site.)
From Engadget website:
MagLev turbines use full-permanent magnets to nearly eliminate friction by "floating" the blades above the base. According to developers, the technology is capable of scaling to massive sizes, with a proposed $53M turbine able enough to replace 1000 traditional windmills and power 750 thousand homes. Additional benefits include the ability to generate power with winds as slow as three miles per hour, operational costs some 50 percent cheaper than windmills, and an estimated lifespan of 500 years.
Engadget - http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/26/maglev-wind-turbines-1000x-more-effiencient-than-normal-windmill/
Jay Leno's Garage has a good video explanation of the MagLev turbines. (See link)
Leno Also has a nice video of his solar panels and a small vertical axis turbine that powers most of his building's electricity.
Building Green is not merely about products and widgets that are green. It's about an approach to building and planning communities that must also parallel green product/equipment development.
Like, the idea of planning communities so that you can walk to stores, school, sports, health care, work etc. and not be required to drive to everything. (I wrote my masters thesis on this topic 25 yrs ago..) The idea of really integrating public transportation in all urban areas. The idea of also creating mini recycling and energy producing hubs that serve the energy needs of that immediate area (i.e. decentralizing energy/electricity generation in particular.)
Example: create building designs and home & wind farms that can serve 100K people locally, independently. This kind of self-sufficient community is possible, because we have seen communities the world over do it in Germany, Spain, Netherlands, etc. It's been just the USA that has been slow to act. And our building codes & zoning laws would have to change dramatically.
In this example, CENTRALIZING ENERGY IS ACTUALLY LESS COST EFFECTIVE (which runs counter to how Americans monetize and think about business.) In fact, the major issue slowing the ADOPTION of WIND is NOT the technology itself-- it's the cost to run the "extension cord" from the wind farm to the areas that need the energy (with a heavy dose of mis information about wind by competing energy companies. Think of OIL companies who will lose $$ if we move toward wind and solar. Big Oil is working actively to provide mis-information about solar and wind.)
Exxon Mobil Spends 1% of its profits on Alternative energy http://is.gd/6C2y
IN European communities that have and use Wind effectively, the wind (or solar) farm is local. The cost to run the "extension cord" to the power grid is what stopped TBoone Pickens in his tracks. Wind is getting a bad rap by people who like to don't know what they are talking about.
TBoone Pickens has it right. Wind is the best and right energy technology that we could start using right now, but in a local way- not the centralized way that we use now use nuclear or coal.
Lastly, depending on your Location/City/State, you can get either a rebate, tax refund or grant for between 15-100% of the cost to put in small energy saving equipment. So in those cases, if you are ALSO selling power BACk to the grid, your payback is a lot faster than the 10-20 years. But i admit, cost savings and rebates vary greatly by states & towns.
People need to lobby Obama & State legislators for WIND tax breaks, grants and incentives to jump start widespread adoption. Solar currently provides better incentives to property owners, but wind might be easier to adopt than solar in many areas.
Snarky replies (above) aside, the public was also "told" by so-called experts that the public did not want hybrid or more fuel efficient cars. Isn't that what the car manufacturers said ?
Wind coupled WITH solar and other energy conservation methods can move all of us aways from our dependence on 20th century energy sources (i.e. nuclear, coal). No one is claiming WIND is the sole future energy source. Even hydro energy is worth looking into (more). But wind is more viable (and cheaper) than people think.
Conservation & behavior modification is also a component of a sustainable lifestyle. We can't just consume more electricity (than we do now) just because we move toward solar or wind technology adoption.
The biggest obstacle to wind power in more dense, urban areas is :
a) building and zoning codes that never anticipated turbines (and solar)
b) mis information based on OLD TECHNOLOGY (e.g. false info re: height requirements, maintenance, propeller noise, code barriers, etc.
c) running the "extension cord" from the remote wind (or solar) farm to the main power grid. It's not the technology cost, its the connection cost to the power grid from remote wind/solar farm locations. That suggests how we locate and think about wind turbines MUST change.
There are vertical wind axis turbines and horizontal wind turbines that are showing great promise that don't require being 30 ft in the air (like propeller turbines). The idea that all/most turbines in cities need to be placed "above the trees and roof tops" is just FALSE. Obviously there are micro climates-- partially even created by built structures. You can have 30 mph wind gusts in some areas at 6 ft off the ground (like in my Chicago neighborhood RIGHT NOW!)
Aerotecture Turbines (Chicago) is an American company that has horizontally placed turbines.
http://www.aerotecture.com/projects_mlh.html
See the Aerotecture Website for Photos not shown here of the Mercy Lakefront SRO Turbine project.
There is ALSO an interesting new vertical axis turbine that has none of the bearing/maintenance problems (supposedly) that the other propeller & vertical axis turbines that Cyrusrus refers to in the post above. They are called MAGLev (Magnetic) Wind Turbines. http://magturbine.com/
Engadget & Jay Leno's Garage both have good explanations of how these magnetic turbines are better than the ball bearing, mechanical turbines. (The MagLev manf has a lousy web site.)
From Engadget website:
MagLev turbines use full-permanent magnets to nearly eliminate friction by "floating" the blades above the base. According to developers, the technology is capable of scaling to massive sizes, with a proposed $53M turbine able enough to replace 1000 traditional windmills and power 750 thousand homes. Additional benefits include the ability to generate power with winds as slow as three miles per hour, operational costs some 50 percent cheaper than windmills, and an estimated lifespan of 500 years.
Engadget - http://www.engadget.com/2007/11/26/maglev-wind-turbines-1000x-more-effiencient-than-normal-windmill/
Jay Leno's Garage has a good video explanation of the MagLev turbines. (See link)
Leno Also has a nice video of his solar panels and a small vertical axis turbine that powers most of his building's electricity.
Building Green is not merely about products and widgets that are green. It's about an approach to building and planning communities that must also parallel green product/equipment development.
Like, the idea of planning communities so that you can walk to stores, school, sports, health care, work etc. and not be required to drive to everything. (I wrote my masters thesis on this topic 25 yrs ago..) The idea of really integrating public transportation in all urban areas. The idea of also creating mini recycling and energy producing hubs that serve the energy needs of that immediate area (i.e. decentralizing energy/electricity generation in particular.)
Example: create building designs and home & wind farms that can serve 100K people locally, independently. This kind of self-sufficient community is possible, because we have seen communities the world over do it in Germany, Spain, Netherlands, etc. It's been just the USA that has been slow to act. And our building codes & zoning laws would have to change dramatically.
In this example, CENTRALIZING ENERGY IS ACTUALLY LESS COST EFFECTIVE (which runs counter to how Americans monetize and think about business.) In fact, the major issue slowing the ADOPTION of WIND is NOT the technology itself-- it's the cost to run the "extension cord" from the wind farm to the areas that need the energy (with a heavy dose of mis information about wind by competing energy companies. Think of OIL companies who will lose $$ if we move toward wind and solar. Big Oil is working actively to provide mis-information about solar and wind.)
Exxon Mobil Spends 1% of its profits on Alternative energy http://is.gd/6C2y
IN European communities that have and use Wind effectively, the wind (or solar) farm is local. The cost to run the "extension cord" to the power grid is what stopped TBoone Pickens in his tracks. Wind is getting a bad rap by people who like to don't know what they are talking about.
TBoone Pickens has it right. Wind is the best and right energy technology that we could start using right now, but in a local way- not the centralized way that we use now use nuclear or coal.
Lastly, depending on your Location/City/State, you can get either a rebate, tax refund or grant for between 15-100% of the cost to put in small energy saving equipment. So in those cases, if you are ALSO selling power BACk to the grid, your payback is a lot faster than the 10-20 years. But i admit, cost savings and rebates vary greatly by states & towns.
People need to lobby Obama & State legislators for WIND tax breaks, grants and incentives to jump start widespread adoption. Solar currently provides better incentives to property owners, but wind might be easier to adopt than solar in many areas.
Snarky replies (above) aside, the public was also "told" by so-called experts that the public did not want hybrid or more fuel efficient cars. Isn't that what the car manufacturers said ?
Wind coupled WITH solar and other energy conservation methods can move all of us aways from our dependence on 20th century energy sources (i.e. nuclear, coal). No one is claiming WIND is the sole future energy source. Even hydro energy is worth looking into (more). But wind is more viable (and cheaper) than people think.
Conservation & behavior modification is also a component of a sustainable lifestyle. We can't just consume more electricity (than we do now) just because we move toward solar or wind technology adoption.
source(s):
- Licensed Architect, 24+ Years Experienced.
Certified Energy Professional - over 9 years
MagLev Video of Jay Leno and Manf's Rep discussing why it's better than propeller ball bearing turbines -
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=913522
And
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=913522
MgLev turbine Explained Further -
http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/11/26/super-powered-magnetic-wind-turbine-mag...
Info & Video is also posted on the treehugger.com website -
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/jay-leno-and-ed-begley-jr-talk-wind...
- Licensed Architect, 24+ Years Experienced.
Certified Energy Professional - over 9 years
MagLev Video of Jay Leno and Manf's Rep discussing why it's better than propeller ball bearing turbines -
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=913522
And
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=913522
MgLev turbine Explained Further -
http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/11/26/super-powered-magnetic-wind-turbine-mag...
Info & Video is also posted on the treehugger.com website -
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/jay-leno-and-ed-begley-jr-talk-wind...
| Asker's rating: |
They're an extremely effective source of energy for the home however they can get quite costly to set up. I've added a comparative chart of the available options.
I checked jasoncalacanis link and it gave a lot of good information. In exploring that link I ran into http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/wind_maps.asp which has windmaps of the US States. I was surprised to find that I was in an area rated poor for wind. These maps might be worthwhile to look at before you decide to go to wind instead of solar.
Wind power won't work for everyone. "For people in suburbia or towns, wind generators are not terribly practical," says Richard Perez, publisher of Home Power magazine. Ideally, he says, you need a very windy site and a very big backyard to make it work--10 acres is ideal, though it can work if you own only 3 or 4 acres. Zoning restrictions and neighbors' concerns with aesthetics also can be large hurdles, Perez says. Furthermore, some municipalities place limitations on the height of towers. And neighbors may complain of obstructed views and the noise caused by a spinning rotor assembly. Even safety can be an issue in a densely populated area if high winds blow a rotor blade off or collapse the assembly.
Perez's survey of his readership shows that 82 percent are primarily interested in photovoltaic solar technologies, while only 16 percent are mostly interested in wind. (The remainder are interested in micro-hydropower for homes with appropriately sited streams.)
For wind power to work, you need annual wind speeds averaging 8 to 9 mph. If the property is wooded, you will have to mount your turbine on a tower that is at least 30 ft. above any obstruction within 500 ft. of the tower, including buildings and trees. That's where the undisturbed and most powerful air currents are located. The best way to determine if you have enough wind is to measure it with an anemometer for a full year. One called NRG WindWatcher is available from www.realgoods.com for about $400.
Homeowner-scaled wind power systems have improved in the last few decades. Many of the bugs of older units have been worked out. Today's turbines don't have the trouble-prone drivetrains or mechanical governors of their predecessors, but instead employ direct-drive, permanent-magnet alternators. They are quieter and they automatically furl (fold back) the rotor in high winds.
Wind turbine rating is a tricky affair. While solar-electric module or microhydro-electric turbine production can be predicted fairly realistically based on rated output, this number is very misleading with wind turbines. Why? Because rated output is pegged to a particular wind speed, and different manufacturers use different wind speeds to determine rated output. Also, the power available in the wind varies with the cube of its speed, so small increases in wind speed result in large increases in power available to the rotor. A 10 percent increase in wind speed yields a 33 percent increase in power available in the wind. Conversely, this means that a turbine rated at 1,000 watts at 28 mph might produce only 125 watts or less at half that wind speed, 14 mph.
Perez's survey of his readership shows that 82 percent are primarily interested in photovoltaic solar technologies, while only 16 percent are mostly interested in wind. (The remainder are interested in micro-hydropower for homes with appropriately sited streams.)
For wind power to work, you need annual wind speeds averaging 8 to 9 mph. If the property is wooded, you will have to mount your turbine on a tower that is at least 30 ft. above any obstruction within 500 ft. of the tower, including buildings and trees. That's where the undisturbed and most powerful air currents are located. The best way to determine if you have enough wind is to measure it with an anemometer for a full year. One called NRG WindWatcher is available from www.realgoods.com for about $400.
Homeowner-scaled wind power systems have improved in the last few decades. Many of the bugs of older units have been worked out. Today's turbines don't have the trouble-prone drivetrains or mechanical governors of their predecessors, but instead employ direct-drive, permanent-magnet alternators. They are quieter and they automatically furl (fold back) the rotor in high winds.
Wind turbine rating is a tricky affair. While solar-electric module or microhydro-electric turbine production can be predicted fairly realistically based on rated output, this number is very misleading with wind turbines. Why? Because rated output is pegged to a particular wind speed, and different manufacturers use different wind speeds to determine rated output. Also, the power available in the wind varies with the cube of its speed, so small increases in wind speed result in large increases in power available to the rotor. A 10 percent increase in wind speed yields a 33 percent increase in power available in the wind. Conversely, this means that a turbine rated at 1,000 watts at 28 mph might produce only 125 watts or less at half that wind speed, 14 mph.
source(s):
http://www.popularmechanics.com/home_journal/home_improvement/1390722.html?...
http://www.homepower.com/basics/wind/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/home_journal/home_improvement/1390722.html?...
http://www.homepower.com/basics/wind/
Some of the technology has changed, so the article from Home Power Mag is a little dated and untrue. Wind technology is changing fast, so what was true 3 years ago is not true not.
Any examples, or just a sweeping generalization?
I saw an article in Time extolling the virtues of home wind power, and got interested enough to do some calculations. Turns out that the payback time on your investment is 15-20 years, and that's assuming maintenance costs don't rack up and energy prices stay high.
In a nutshell, whether you want to help the environment or save money, there have to be far more cost-effective and impactful ways of doing it than getting a wind turbine. e.g. Get a more fuel efficient vehicle.
In a nutshell, whether you want to help the environment or save money, there have to be far more cost-effective and impactful ways of doing it than getting a wind turbine. e.g. Get a more fuel efficient vehicle.
Wind turbines are effective at generating power for a home, but the return on investment might not be worth the price of the turbine.
Related questions
140 characters left
ask any question
