| "Jet Engine" Wind Turbines Could Quadruple Power Generation |
| Written by Hank Green | |
| Wednesday, 26 March 2008 | |
|
When we wrote about FloDesign's weird-looking wind turbines a while back, we were pretty excited about the new design. But we were a little confused by how the things worked. Well, FloDesign seems to have taken my confusion to heart, because they've created a very nice video showing exactly how the turbines work. If you can get over the inspirational music, then you're in for a treat. They take the time to explain a bit about how the turbine actually works, and also show that it's much easier to ship, requires less infrastructure, can be placed closer to people, and can be more tightly spaced in a wind farm. The new turbines extract three to four times more energy from the wind, and so can be much smaller. They don't upset the flow of the wind as much, and so can be placed closer together. And since there is no risk of catastrophic failure (see video below) they can be placed nearer to populations. All of this adds up to pulling a heck of a lot more energy from the wind. The trick will be figuring out how to mass produce the parts from strong, lightweight materials inexpensively. And then, they need to figure a way to put all the pieces together without compromising the strength of the turbine. The Massachusetts Technology Collaborative has just invested $500,000 in FloDesign to help them scale up. I'm not sure what they'll be doing with the money (don't worry, I'm after them for an interview), but I imagine that amount could help them a great deal with prototyping. FloDesign is definitely a company that we'll have our eyes on. This could be a game changer for wind.
Comments
(28)
Fascinating--If It works
written by dbx1 , March 26, 2008
I have always wondered why aeronautical engineering was not more involved in the design of windmills. It looks like it has a lot of potential--if the engineering works out. This would be a natural for carbon fiber construction.
I don't think this page has turned up on
written by Leon45 , March 27, 2008
A side from that - it looks pretty interesting. Though that video seems to spend more time telling us why the old design aren't very good rather than telling us the new ones good points.
...
written by alex , March 28, 2008
Hey thanks for the great blog, love this stuff. I don’t usually do much for Earth Day but with everyone going green these days I thought I try to do my part.
I am trying to find easy, simple things I can do to help stop global warming (I stress easy, I don’t plan on going out and buying a hybrid). I took the Earth Day Challenge that EarthLab.com is promoting ( http://www.earthlab.com/ ) and I am planning on lowering my score. They have some pretty good tips (they call them pledges). I am looking for more easy fun stuff to do. If you know of any other sites worth my time let me know.
It is a true breakthru
written by bobNASA , March 28, 2008
I dowloaded the AIAA paper on their site. This thing IS a game changer. They have addressed all the reasons prior shrouded designs failed! I wish I thought of it!
whats happens when thing get sucked in
written by bob , March 28, 2008
Whats the danger to wildlife? I can imagine something getting sucked in and breaking this thing. Nice idea though.
Psst. Con man.
written by tussock , March 29, 2008
Modern large scale wind turbines run at better than 90% of the ideal efficiency. That ideal is itself nearly 60% of the total wind energy by area traced.
Someone who's saying they can triple that is saying they're collecting better than 150% of the total wind energy, which must involve gaining energy by stopping it, then gaining some more by restarting it. Clever that. Anyone who believes it needs to go over the laws of thermodynamics some more. A lot more. Until you get it. Either way, do not give this con man your money.
Wildlife
written by Hank , March 29, 2008
Though, obviously, they haven't tested these things in the field yet, there's some signs that they will be less damaging to wildlife. Because of the speed of the tips of traditional prop turbines, it's difficult for birds to actually see them. These will appear to birds as static, so they will be easier to avoid. Birds and bats don't generally fly int what they can see. Though, of course, we'll have to wait and see. Cell towers are also static and definitely contribute somewhat to bird mortality.
...
written by Tim , March 29, 2008
I don't understand the fluid dynamics or other science going on here but am curious that with the intersected area being so much less than a regular turbine it could recover so much useful energy.
a bit misleading but perhaps not a con
written by Josh , March 29, 2008
@Tussock
I'm guessing the three to four times more energy estimation is being calculated not per turbine which as you say is physically impossible but by land area. They claim that they can put these turbines much closer together which implies that they can capture more energy per hectare. Does that make any sense?
Works better at low speeds and high spee
written by Al Fin , March 29, 2008
Yep, 3-4 times the energy by land area. I'm impressed by the much wider range of wind speeds that are usable by this design.
These blades spin up to much higher speeds--like a gas turbine or steam turbine. The "vortices" generated behind the blades are simply a way of increasing pressure differential on either side of the fan blades. This draws more air through the blades. If you know anything about gas turbines, you'll understand at least part of the design advantage.
Size
written by josh , March 29, 2008
I am very impressed if they can make these work. Texas is covered with wind farms, which makes you feel good. However, when you see the "oversize load" truck in front of you and it's only carrying the very tip of the prop. It really makes you think these windmills should be a little smaller.
Earth Hour
written by Emily , March 30, 2008
Hey! I participated in earth hour last night,and i was wondering if you knew of any statistics that show the effect it had on CO2 emmissions. If you do, it would be great if you posted them!
Removal of wind energy
written by Randall Sperksy , March 30, 2008
This might all be well and good for the power generation company and the manufacturer of the wind generators, but we have to face the fact that generation of energy in this way is theft. The people downwind of the generator are being denied their wind rights. If wind generators become very commonplace then I expect to see legal action taken over wind theft.
...
written by tussock , March 30, 2008
:sigh: The limits on wind power are proportional to the vertical area swept by the blade, a cross section of the moving air. We are already running above 90% of that limit.
Land area isn't particularly useful as a measurement of any kind, unless your towers are low enough to make it unavailable for other uses. Here in NZ we put farmland under them, as the ground-level air isn't efficient anyway. Cross-sectional area * air density * velocity^3 * time. That's the wind energy of an air stream moving through a vertical area. Generating energy with the blade takes energy from the air stream, and we're already very near the limits of how much can be taken. Laws of thermodynamics, people; vortexes don't create energy, they use it.
...
written by Josh , March 31, 2008
@Tussock
I had a gut feeling you were right. Hank gets a bit carried away with some of these press releases and I just got caught up in the moment too. The combination of smaller turbines and less land use would be useful in some (limited) situations but the promises here are obviously too good to be true if we're already seeing 90% utilisation with regular turbines. Thanks Josh
Really, it IS possible.
written by Dave , March 31, 2008
This design actually pulls in a greater volume of air due to the clever use of pressures at different points within the system. The video clearly explains this principle. This means that the turbine can actually grab more energy than an equivalent bladed design with the same vertical area swept by the blade because it's pulling in more air into the same area.
However, the 3x improvement claim is still only correct if you compare the two systems in the right way. Comparing it by land area appears valid to me but I would be surprised if you could space these things 1/3rd of the distance apart. However, for the same sized wind farm, you can extract some amount of extra energy out of the wind. That means something to me. Also, if this thing can run at a greater variety of wind speeds, they may be including the extra time it is possible to run the new turbine in the calculation. If you add the increased energy extraction per unit of land area and the larger variety of wind speeds this turbine can run in I suspect you will get close the a 3x improvement in output from a single windfarm. As far as litigation from people downwind from a wind farm is concerned, I doubt that they'll get anywhere. Firstly, they would have to prove that they are actually receiving less wind and that the amount of wind they are not receiving is actually causing them harm. Secondly, the damages will only be proportional to the damages the lack of wind actually causes them, which will be almost negligible. We're not talking about a completely calm day when everywhere else is getting 20 knots. We're talking about these guys getting 19.9 knots when everywhere else is getting 20 knots.
...
written by disdaniel , March 31, 2008
I think it is a clever looking design...but gosh it uses a lot of material for the amount of area swept...maybe this is better than other shroud designs, but does the extra energy from the air speed/versatility provide greater value than the extra material cost?
Time will tell.
Safer at higher speeds
written by Woody , March 31, 2008
Even if this delivers exactly the same power at a given wind speed the other benefits would make it worth while to pursue. Being safelyusable at slower and higher speeds, and transportable on one truck vs many sounds like a design improvement worth making this something to look at.
Trade-offs
written by William Wilgus , April 06, 2008
This is really just a trade-off: High-torque (long, slow blades) vs. high-horsepower (shorter, faster blades). The vortex generation bit is simply an attempt to couple more wind energy into the blades; but as the wind speed increases, the apparent wind angle will change---and that will change the efficiency of the FloDesign turbine. Finally, the larger diamater of the after tube is just taking advantage of the Bernoulli principle to `suck' more air through the turbine. As far as safety is concerned, the higher rotational speeds of the FloDesign might actually present greater damage potential than the slower long blade.
Claptrap until they furnish power compar
written by William Wilgus , April 06, 2008
It's the old trade-off of high torque (long, slow blades) vs. high horsepower (fast, short blades). Let's see actual power generated comparisons.
Claptrap until they furnish power compar
written by William Wilgus , April 06, 2008
It's the old trade-off of high torque (long, slow blades) vs. high horsepower (fast, short blades). Let's see actual power generated comparisons.
noise polution
written by Tom , May 19, 2008
I'm more interested in the noise pollution. I know in my computer a larger, slower spinning fan is quieter than a small turbine style fan. I could only imagine the noise from acre's of these things humming along...
i have no enthusiasm for a machine which
written by dan , June 22, 2008
so far this is hot air. where is the prototype? where are any performance data? who has built one? where is it?
what is it? so far - nothing.
U Fools
written by Cleva Clogs , November 13, 2008
Whoever is blithering about we already have 90% efficiency from standard wind turbine, is completly missing the point of these. You need your head deflating.
They are saying they are 3-4 times more efficiant, because they can run at any wind speed, in any direction, and can be placed closer together, nearer residential areas. They cost less to build and maintain apperantly too. Why are there so many apparent more intelligent people here that have taken one look at this video and already decided that these will not work, or are not more efficient. Considering some institute has invested half a million into this suggests people that know what there talkin about think its a good idea.
you really dont understand..
written by Cleva Clogs , November 13, 2008
tussock. Have you actually listened to the video and read the reports on this?
I quote your comment: 'Laws of thermodynamics, people; vortexes don't create energy, they use it' They do not use the energy from the vortex it creates, this was explained so that it dissapates the energy so that they can be placed closer together. With the old 'fashioned' designes because they 'block' the on-comming wind, turbines have to be placed further away so they can use the power from the wind. If you are so smart, please go away and design somthing better than this.
law suits against taking my wind?
written by last comment , November 13, 2008
This makes me laugh out loud! Lets trade our planet for the potential law suits that might (lol) occur from 'wind stealing'. You are basically suggesting that we not use wind farms at all. Why are people so negative about this change in design?
Amazing confusion
written by Physicsman , December 06, 2008
Torque is a static rotational quantity, whereas, Horsepower is a linear quantiy with a time component mixing the two can be done and is done regularly in the automotive world. My confusion comes when those massivly long blades are not used for their torque, because in the nacelle they turn a generator which is regulated to a very precise number of rotations. The Windflo is designed to use its higher revolutions to turn a generator as fast as possible, which if done correctly will be far more efficient.
The fluid dynamics are sound. I would love to see a prototype. BTW more squirrels are killed crossing the road everyday than all the birds in the world killed by wind turbines. So who's watching out for the squirrels?hmmmmmmm? As for the downwind lawsuits...you probably didn't recieve your Christmas presents due to potential liability issues either. | |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Science, technology gadgets and...baby seals. We're in a bit of an eco-mess, but we've got the brains to lick any problem. And that's why EcoGeek.org publishes up to ten stories daily about innovations that are saving the planet.
And if that sounds interesting to you, then congratulations, you're an EcoGeek.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
