An alternative to large scale wind farms is "windcrofting," installing rows of smaller-scale turbines for power generation. In this arrangement, farmers rent land to the company which installs and maintains the turbines. They can also buy cheap electricity from the turbines, and the excess is sold onto the grid. Because the turbines are typically set in rows between fields, no productive farmland is lost from this scheme.
Proven Energy is beginning a program for windcrofting in the UK, and has already installed more than 1000 of their turbines on farms. Even before the company had begun advertising they had more than 30 farms enrolled in the program. According to a company spokesman, "If we had a turbine like this on every farm in Britain we would provide about 50 per cent of Britain's electricity."
There are generation efficiencies from using large-scale turbines, but the smaller turbines can be installed in more marginal locations. They also cause less visual intrusion (for people who think they are unattractive) because the smaller turbines are mounted on shorter masts. And farmland is generally going to have the open space that makes wind power effective.
via: Eco Street
Hits: 16631
Comments (12)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by h, February 03, 2007
I wonder what the blade speed is and how much of a fuss the avian impact folks will make about collisions.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Bill Gates, February 04, 2007
Studies have shown(dont ask me to cite, cant find the one i've read previously) that avian impacts are marginal.
-
- +0
-
-
written by jinks, February 05, 2007
I always laugh about the avian impact argument, as if wind turbines are any different from tall skyscrapers.
I don't have any data, but I'd be willing to bet that more birds die from flying into the top-story glass windows of Manhattan than from flying into all the wind turbines in the US.
Any ways, if the wind turbines don't get the birds, global warming will...
I don't have any data, but I'd be willing to bet that more birds die from flying into the top-story glass windows of Manhattan than from flying into all the wind turbines in the US.
Any ways, if the wind turbines don't get the birds, global warming will...
-
- +0
-
-
written by ken, February 06, 2007
perhaps this approach could be used to sneak alternative energy under the " radar " of the oil cartel in the U S --- by offering it to various GOVERNORS of the STATES that have good wind resorces ---- and avoid washington D C completely ken
-
- +0
-
-
written by Ron Wagner, February 06, 2007
I could see a great boost in raptor and carnivore populations. Eventually word would get around the bird world.
Have there been any objective long term studies of the effect on bird populations?
Ron
Have there been any objective long term studies of the effect on bird populations?
Ron
-
- +0
-
-
written by Paul, February 06, 2007
I own and operate a small turbine (11 ft diameter) close to the northern shore of lake Erie, Ontario, Canada. The top of the blades are about 65 feet off ground level. I inspect my turbine on a regular basis and I've never noticed any dead or mamed birds in the area. I've heard that the grills of cars kill more birds than wind turbines.
Paul
Paul
-
- +0
-
-
written by samuel, February 08, 2007
This could help decentralize power generation in one moment of inflationary pressure on an ailment that is involved in 15% of inflation pressure, compared to oil that is 8%.
Beside, is it available in the BRIC countries?
Beside, is it available in the BRIC countries?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Philip Proefrock, February 09, 2007
Bird kill is an ongoing concern for wind turbines, and is one of the regular arguments brought out in opposition to new installations. Tens of thousands of birds are killed each year by running into windows on man-made buildings, so, by comparison, wind turbines are not really that much more dangerous to birds than any other man-made structure.
Secondly, the damage to habitat and to wildlife in general caused by other factors in power generation (global warming, acid rain, habitat loss due to mountain-top removal coal mining, to name a few) is probably a greater threat to birds in aggregate. It's just easier to complain when the cause is more immediately visible.
The smaller turbines used in this kind of installation tend to spin faster than large-scale turbines do, and are therefore generally more visible and less threatening to bird populations.
Secondly, the damage to habitat and to wildlife in general caused by other factors in power generation (global warming, acid rain, habitat loss due to mountain-top removal coal mining, to name a few) is probably a greater threat to birds in aggregate. It's just easier to complain when the cause is more immediately visible.
The smaller turbines used in this kind of installation tend to spin faster than large-scale turbines do, and are therefore generally more visible and less threatening to bird populations.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Schalk, February 19, 2007
i know that they use rotating pyramidal reflectors in orchards to scare birds away from grape and other small fruits especially. these merely reflect the sun. stick some chromic tape on the tips and centres of those wind turbines maybe...
-
- +0
-
-
written by celia, March 06, 2007
Don't turbines create some sort of wake? Wouldn't birds avoid this sort of wake?
I'm glad to see farmers and windmills getting along. It makes me feel all fuzzy inside.
I'm glad to see farmers and windmills getting along. It makes me feel all fuzzy inside.
-
- +0
-
-
written by ralph, May 29, 2008
Hi,
A minor correction in termanology may be appropriate regarding Wind Turbines.
In my years of working with wind I have determined that 4 major things Generate wind:
1. Uneven heating of the earth.
2. Fans
3. Politicians,
4. Foods such as lentels, cabbage, beans, etc.
On the other hand "Wind Turbines" Usually Generate Electricity.
While you have the net available, Google "wind turbine bird kill" There you will see that your lovely house cat has a kill ratio of over 10,000 to 1, compaired with wind turbines.
be informed
A minor correction in termanology may be appropriate regarding Wind Turbines.
In my years of working with wind I have determined that 4 major things Generate wind:
1. Uneven heating of the earth.
2. Fans
3. Politicians,
4. Foods such as lentels, cabbage, beans, etc.
On the other hand "Wind Turbines" Usually Generate Electricity.
While you have the net available, Google "wind turbine bird kill" There you will see that your lovely house cat has a kill ratio of over 10,000 to 1, compaired with wind turbines.
be informed
-
- +0
-
-
written by Roger Hollies, February 17, 2009
Nice discussions!
I'm currently doing a project on the feasible roll out of small wind (2.5-50kw) in the UK as part of an MSc in Energy. This Windcrofting is certainly a great idea bringing the benefits of clean generation and centralised generation together. A word of caution however about the above quote form the 'company spokesman' A recent study by the carbon trust and met office show that if every single house hold in the country put up a turbine (small building mounted in urban and sub urban with larger turbines in rural areas) the total energy generated per year would be around the 100TWh mark at most. The UK consumes somewhere in the region of 400TWh per year. IF you look at a realistic (but still optimisitic) take up of say 10% househlods with a turbine then we are looknig at 2.5 percent of UK electricity supplied by small wind. Don't get me wrong, this is a significant amount and with the increased benefit of decentralising the grid makes is a very worthwhile thing to push but throwing figures of supplying 50% UK electricity by small wind can have a detrimental effect to how people working in this field (arf) are percieved.
sorry, I've gone on a bit!
Roger H
A word of
I'm currently doing a project on the feasible roll out of small wind (2.5-50kw) in the UK as part of an MSc in Energy. This Windcrofting is certainly a great idea bringing the benefits of clean generation and centralised generation together. A word of caution however about the above quote form the 'company spokesman' A recent study by the carbon trust and met office show that if every single house hold in the country put up a turbine (small building mounted in urban and sub urban with larger turbines in rural areas) the total energy generated per year would be around the 100TWh mark at most. The UK consumes somewhere in the region of 400TWh per year. IF you look at a realistic (but still optimisitic) take up of say 10% househlods with a turbine then we are looknig at 2.5 percent of UK electricity supplied by small wind. Don't get me wrong, this is a significant amount and with the increased benefit of decentralising the grid makes is a very worthwhile thing to push but throwing figures of supplying 50% UK electricity by small wind can have a detrimental effect to how people working in this field (arf) are percieved.
sorry, I've gone on a bit!
Roger H
A word of
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
FEB 02
"Nice discussions! I'm currently doing a project on the feasible roll o..."
View all Comments