Innovative British Consultancy XCO2 has come up with an novel design of urban wind turbine that it believes will help wind power acheive better market penetration than other designs.
The aesthetic of the design differs significantly from the traditional horizontal axis turbine that we're used to seeing, but breaks with the tradition of horizontal axis turbines by being both vertically oriented and also helical in shape.
Named the Quiet Revolution 5, to reflect its low noise design features, the turbine incorporates a number of features into its design that are designed to minimise the audible intrusion generated in operation.
More after the jump.
The blades of the QR5 are gently tapered, to minimise noise – the blades being constructed from carbon fibre.
The QR5 also adheres to the principles of simplicity, sacrificing the complexity of a gearbox, for a direct-drive motor. The design aims to reduce maintenance costs by making all moving parts sealed units. The design incorporates a 6kW generator, and operates in wind conditions between 4 m/s and 16 m/s.
The design has an operational life of 25 years and has been constructed to be relatively maintenance free during that period.
Assuming an average wind speed of 5.8 m/s, with 10, 000kWh being generated each year, the turbine will have a financial payback period of 15 years – however, as the price of oil continues to spiral, there is no reason why the turbine could not pay for itself in less time.
Hits: 40222
Comments (26)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Hector Rodriguez, September 09, 2006
Could this design be risky for birds abd/or bats?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Hank, September 09, 2006
There was a great article at TreeHugger a while back about the effects of wind turbines on birds. The overall conclusion was that wind turbines aren't all that much dangerous than any object that might stick up in the middle of a field (grain silo, cell tower, house, etc.)
But that, yes, birds and bats do get hurt by wind turbines. here's the treehugger article http://www.treehugger.com/file...sconce.php
But that, yes, birds and bats do get hurt by wind turbines. here's the treehugger article http://www.treehugger.com/file...sconce.php
-
- +1
-
-
written by dirty sanchez, September 09, 2006
yes, wind turbines kill birds...
so do skyscrapers with clean windows, cars driving down the highway, people at the beach who throw rocks at seagulls that piss them off, kids who feed bread and alka seltzer to seagulls that piss them off, other birds, cats, dogs, hunters...etc
look at the cost-benefit ratio...while it is unfortunate that wildlife is harmed, the number of animals killed by wind turbines is far fewer than other technologies. while this is not a very good argument for using wind turbines, the lack of reliance on fossil fuels for energy is. i'd like to see a wind turbine coupled with some other technologies to increase the power yield.
so do skyscrapers with clean windows, cars driving down the highway, people at the beach who throw rocks at seagulls that piss them off, kids who feed bread and alka seltzer to seagulls that piss them off, other birds, cats, dogs, hunters...etc
look at the cost-benefit ratio...while it is unfortunate that wildlife is harmed, the number of animals killed by wind turbines is far fewer than other technologies. while this is not a very good argument for using wind turbines, the lack of reliance on fossil fuels for energy is. i'd like to see a wind turbine coupled with some other technologies to increase the power yield.
-
- +0
-
-
written by monotonehell, September 09, 2006
Has anyone thought of putting a grille cage around a turbine to stop the occasional bird kill? (Which I've always maintained as sanchez above, kill less birds than a lot of other things we do)
-
- +0
-
-
written by beardedfish, September 10, 2006
From what I understand the biggest problem with bird kill from Windmills happens when we stick a wind farm in the middle of migratory valley. That is why the San Fran wind farm got so much crap for killing birds. If one stuck a bunch of rock crushers in the middle of a highway a lot of people would get killed. I know it is a weak analogy but you get the point. One can minimize bird kill with intelligently places turbines outside of migratory highways.
-
- +0
-
-
written by R, September 29, 2006
In addition to not placing towers in migratory pathways, I understand that the other key factor is using a tower style that minimizes points for perching by raptors, i.e., using a tubular steel tower not a steel lattice tower.
-
- +0
-
-
written by epavlides, September 30, 2006
Wind turbines are far safer than non-moving towers because according to radar studies their quite movement is heard by birds at night and avoid wind turbines while they crash into chimneys, buildings, or telecommunication towers. A grill would make the turbine more dangerous not less dangerous because it would increase the surface that the bird might fly into. In fact large wind turbines that reduce several million KWh a year displace really dangerous electricity from fossil fuels. Coal and oil produce acid rain that kills snails critical to bird diet for eggs to have hard shells. Soft eggs do not mature and cause regional bird extinctions. Mercury pollution from coal burning contaminates the surrounding area and also causes bird extinctions because mercury a potent neurotoxin make birds fidgety and do not roust their eggs properly. The loons have been wiped out from areas of the great lakes in the US because of mercury contamination.
Bottom line windturbines are good for birds and the bigger the better. These little and very expensive turbines might have a role to play but a pound spend on them will make 500% less electricity and therefore reduce 500% less pollution than if it was invested in one of the giant and magnificent looking slow turning wind turbines.
Bottom line windturbines are good for birds and the bigger the better. These little and very expensive turbines might have a role to play but a pound spend on them will make 500% less electricity and therefore reduce 500% less pollution than if it was invested in one of the giant and magnificent looking slow turning wind turbines.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Steve-o, October 18, 2006
Anything that kills birds kills more birds than turbines do. It's sad really that this is always the first objection by, well, objectors (and not very enlightened ones at that) because it immediately puts wind on the defensive.
I guess no fossil fuel ever harmed any kind of life.
I guess no fossil fuel ever harmed any kind of life.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Hudson, November 20, 2006
The fact that other human technologies and activities kill birds is a poor justification for turbines killing more birds.
The Treehugger article seems to be saying that if turbines don't kill *more* birds than other technologies, this should be treated as if they killed none.
Try to imagine that logic applied to other realms of life. (Would your doctor say, "Go ahead and eat as many of those new Cool Ranch Doritos as you like, since they're no worse than the Ruffles Barbeque Potato Chips you normally scarf down"?)
I'm looking for improvements, not lateral movement. So how about coming up with a turbine design that doesn't kill birds?
The Treehugger article seems to be saying that if turbines don't kill *more* birds than other technologies, this should be treated as if they killed none.
Try to imagine that logic applied to other realms of life. (Would your doctor say, "Go ahead and eat as many of those new Cool Ranch Doritos as you like, since they're no worse than the Ruffles Barbeque Potato Chips you normally scarf down"?)
I'm looking for improvements, not lateral movement. So how about coming up with a turbine design that doesn't kill birds?
-
- +1
-
-
written by : ), May 01, 2007
Until we can create an automated turbine that does not require wind to turn power it and can be completely run by solar, or hydrogen, or some other form of renewable energy, this is the best that can be done. Birds are great things and should be protected just as much as everything else on this planet, but if we only focus on the birds and continue burning fossil fuels at the rate that we are going not only will the birds cease to exist, but neither will the trees on which they perch, or the insects on which they feed, or possibly even the people who watch them for enjoyment. Just because wind turbines are put in place doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement, there is always more that we can learn and improve upon. Solar cells are a good example of this. Major research for this renewable source ended in the mid 80's which is why solar panels today only convert about 10% of the solar energy that hits them. 10%!! If we even increased that to 50% we could easily power the needs of every living being. Slow turning wind turbines do kill birds, but they are improving and saving more lives than we can see.
-
- +0
-
-
written by okusi adedoyin, May 03, 2007
the design vanes is fine and may even be of higher efficiency compared to other design but this design will cause so much harm to bird and any flying things.it will be cutting anything that comes its way.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Paul Kirwan, May 07, 2007
has anyone got anything to say about this kind of wind turbine that is not concerned with the bird strike issue, how about some discussion on the design?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Gary, May 18, 2007
There was an omni-directional blade configuration for use under water, too. The idea was that you could get power from the tide, as the blades can take advantage of liquid flowing in any given direction.
But how much does the wind change direction? I wonder if there is really any advantage to this aspect of the design. Perhaps there's a benefit from avoiding the wear and balancing problems associated with traditional designs?
I'm most curious about the direct gearing. If this is a major part of making quiet turbines, then why not use the same trick in a traditional design? Is there something special about being vertical?
But how much does the wind change direction? I wonder if there is really any advantage to this aspect of the design. Perhaps there's a benefit from avoiding the wear and balancing problems associated with traditional designs?
I'm most curious about the direct gearing. If this is a major part of making quiet turbines, then why not use the same trick in a traditional design? Is there something special about being vertical?
-
- +1
-
-
written by Garrett, June 24, 2007
"I'm most curious about the direct gearing. If this is a major part of making quiet turbines, then why not use the same trick in a traditional design? Is there something special about being vertical?"
Speaking of large horizontal axis turbines, the gearbox allows for a much smaller/lighter generator section. A direct drive generator would have a larger profile which both disturbs flow and adds to loads on the tower in the wind, and also would be much heavier which again would require a beefier tower. Beefing up the tower costs a ton of money and also disturbs flow in the field.
I don't know that much about wind turbine design, but it would appear that direct drive has turned out to be a poor compromise for large AC horizontal axis turbines.
There are consumer sized direct drive DC turbines, but they require things like grid tied inverters and usually aren't meant to be the quietest things on earth.
Speaking of large horizontal axis turbines, the gearbox allows for a much smaller/lighter generator section. A direct drive generator would have a larger profile which both disturbs flow and adds to loads on the tower in the wind, and also would be much heavier which again would require a beefier tower. Beefing up the tower costs a ton of money and also disturbs flow in the field.
I don't know that much about wind turbine design, but it would appear that direct drive has turned out to be a poor compromise for large AC horizontal axis turbines.
There are consumer sized direct drive DC turbines, but they require things like grid tied inverters and usually aren't meant to be the quietest things on earth.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Pat McCarthy, June 29, 2007
could one of these turbines be places on a double telegraph pole ? use an RSJ running horizontaly at the top and bottom of the turbine attached to the poles, to stabalise it . Wouls it work? would many of them work on a line of double poles ?
Pat
Pat
-
- +0
-
-
written by krish harikrishnan, July 05, 2007
Dear All,
Agreed that wind turbines kill birds. Even while flying in an airplane we are advised by the crew in an event supply of oxygen is less first fix one of the inhalers to yourself before trying to help your kid infant travelling with you. What do you then dont you follow what they say.
So let's all believe that we should first try to save the world from disaster by installing these win turbines and then try to position some scarecrow sort of device which can deter birds from flying near the turbines.
krish. India
Agreed that wind turbines kill birds. Even while flying in an airplane we are advised by the crew in an event supply of oxygen is less first fix one of the inhalers to yourself before trying to help your kid infant travelling with you. What do you then dont you follow what they say.
So let's all believe that we should first try to save the world from disaster by installing these win turbines and then try to position some scarecrow sort of device which can deter birds from flying near the turbines.
krish. India
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ashley, October 01, 2007
How high does this wind turbine have to be to gain any effectiveness? 10ft high? I can't place anything taller than my house in my yard.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Humane Educator in Illinois, April 04, 2008
I agree that wind energy is better for the planet than most things. Pollution and climate change kill lots of animals.
Birds and bats can have problems with standard wind turbines because of the long slow spinning blades, which can be hard for them to detect and avoid.
Vertical turbines will kill fewer bats and birds because they are easier for the bats and birds to detect (process visually, sonically, and mentally) and so they can avoid them more easily.
It has to do with how the birds and bats see and hear and process information, which is different than the way people do.
Regular turbines should be kept out of migratory routes, but vertical turbines might be able to be used there? It would be good to see a study on this.
Birds and bats can have problems with standard wind turbines because of the long slow spinning blades, which can be hard for them to detect and avoid.
Vertical turbines will kill fewer bats and birds because they are easier for the bats and birds to detect (process visually, sonically, and mentally) and so they can avoid them more easily.
It has to do with how the birds and bats see and hear and process information, which is different than the way people do.
Regular turbines should be kept out of migratory routes, but vertical turbines might be able to be used there? It would be good to see a study on this.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Bror Lindgren, June 03, 2008
I'm interested in your product and would like to know were I can get more info; such as if my geographic location is suitable for your product, pricing, location of dealers; so I could make a decision on a product.
-
- +1
-
-
written by andre ferro, June 16, 2008
How would I know if I ahve a suitable location and would also like to know the price and to see how long it would take to pay for itself
-
- +0
-
-
written by Andrew, October 06, 2008
Is this not also of grave danger to flying fish and blind parachutists (and their dogs). It is of great concern to me that none of you have troubled to think about the environmental consequences of these wind turbines
-
- +0
-
-
written by Vivianna, May 10, 2009
Have you ever seen one kill a bird? If not than you have no real proof! But if you have that's the most tragic thing! If it's really hurting the bird population wouldn't the government have taken them down I mean if it's hurting innocent animal's then they would right? The detruction of too many birds will eventually hurt the ecosystem. So if you haven't actually seen one chop a bird to bits you shouldn't be talking! And they go so slow the bird could get put with it's life! But if it is killing them then why dont they just put some sort of fence around to make it stop hurting the environment!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dinesh, May 20, 2009
What is the blade profile of this design? Does it belongs to any NACA profile? Or is it just an unique shape which is used by the manufacturer?
-
- +0
-
-
written by hyion, July 21, 2009
I'm a firm believer that if we can put a man on the moon, then we can stop birds from flying into whirling propeller blades. We just haven't figured out put the energy into solving that puzzle yet. Is a cage covering the turbine, like a wire mesh covering a household fan, a viable solution?
-
- +0
-
-
written by fastfoodjunkie, December 11, 2009
would be funny to see one installed on top of the KFC in my town. :-)
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
SEP 08
"do vertical remove radar objections?..."
View all Comments