89-Year-Old Man Develops Bladeless Bird-Friendly Wind Turbine

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Bird and bat deaths due wind turbines is very much overblown.

Looks like windows and powerlines are thousands of times more deadly.
I think he's got a great idea and why not just put a wire mesh cone on the front so birds can't possibly fly in to and destroy the turbines blades?

You are correct about turbines not causing many bird deaths, and only if the proper due diligence is done. Here in the mountains for example, an environmental impact study needs to be done for at least a year to test wind conditions, bird migratory paths, and other impacts. Point being that if you build a windmill in a location as a bird migratory path the windmill stands a very good chance to kill many birds, seasonally.

As for your point about putting shielding around the blades, sure, it is possible. But on some of these turbines that are big enough to create kilowatts of power you are looking at rotor diameters of 80 meters, which would be a HUGE screen and quite expensive.

I had a similar idea about wind power and pressure to compress the air to drive a smaller turbine. In the end what really put me off the thought was the fact that if you have wind blowing you have all kinds of dust and debris with taking a larger volume of air (filled with debris) and channeling it into a smaller space concentrates the debris along with the air. The result especially when the immediate climate is moist would be a buildup of some well, crap. I think these while good for an alternative will require much more cleaning and maintenance than their bladed counterparts.

I really hope that this can lead towards wind powered neighborhoods similar to solar power panels. I'd love to have one of these!

reply to post by Screwed


Because birds will avoid the windsock right?! Am I right?!

The irony is deafening at least. All said, wind energy is a good thing if we drop the concern for the birds. It is cheap and is viable but I love how it is pinned on the oil companies when it is the environmental nuts (the crazies, not the normal folk that have normal concerns) get up in arms.

What do you want? Drill for oil using tried and tested technology or use newer technology that may harm some birds?

He patented a funnel? Wow, Funnel Technology. Hmm, looks like a turbine at the end of the funnel. Wouldn't the birds just get funneled into the turbine? How would they fly out? Have you seen the size of the three bladed wind turbines? Do you realize how big this funnel would be? What kind of wind loads would it have? We need an engineer to do some maths on it, but Ill bet there would be huge loading forces put on the funnel.

When i looked into a wind turbine for my home it was going to have to be built on a extremely tall tower. How much bigger would the tower half to be taking into account of the massive wind cross section for this funnel?

I wonder if just believing in something really strongly overcomes real world problems? I wonder why we all don't have wind turbines and solar panels? I wonder why critical thinking isn't taught in every grade from K-12?


V

Good news

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
I have a small-ish AirX turbine, which are sold in marine or RV shops, or if you're out in the country in Feed stores. It makes about 400 watts, give or take, and is perfect for small outbuildings. I use to power outdoor lighting and a cistern pump, all designed to run on DC so I wouldn't have to bother with inverters/etc.

My next goal is to move up to a bigger turbine, and use it supplement my home's electrical needs. Luckily I have the space to erect a larger wind turbine, but it would be nice to use something a little more compact, like this gentleman's design. It can be costly (about $15,000) for a 2kW/hr wind turbine, the amortization rate is still longer than I'd like, but the beauty of it would be greater independence from the electrical utility AND knowing if/when things go south, I can switch to my own power source to run essential household needs. What I do like about this guy's design is that it looks like, for the same amount of space as a typical, residential style AirX-type wind turbine, you could get one that generates a lot more power.

Remember to be smart.

I made the error of choosing an inverter for 600 watts, thinking that it would run the freezers in my workshop.

Nope.

As it happens my freezer tops at about 1200 watts when it starts up the compressor and that trips my inverter, which doesn't start up again automatically.

Originally posted by Philippines

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
***snips***
Looks like windows and powerlines are thousands of times more deadly.
I think he's got a great idea and why not just put a wire mesh cone on the front so birds can't possibly fly in to and destroy the turbines blades?

You are correct about turbines not causing many bird deaths, and only if the proper due diligence is done. Here in the mountains for example, an environmental impact study needs to be done for at least a year to test wind conditions, bird migratory paths, and other impacts. Point being that if you build a windmill in a location as a bird migratory path the windmill stands a very good chance to kill many birds, seasonally.

Point being made here is that we must ignore all the evidence already present. We must ignore the vast number of wind turbines already running with next to no additional deaths among birds.

Consider the fact that three blades on a turbine rotates at a reasonably slow speed. Birds actually see them and takes evasive action. Most birds can easily fly among treea without having a branch "cut them down".

And as with most statistics we can lie. Talking about a 100 % increase in bird deaths as I've seen elsewhere is rediculous when one considers that 100 % increase means four instead of two on a yearly basis at a given location. We must always remember or question the numbers behind the percentages when we read statistics.

Farmers kill vastly more predatory birds on a yearly basis but no one wants to take away their guns.

As for your point about putting shielding around the blades, sure, it is possible. But on some of these turbines that are big enough to create kilowatts of power you are looking at rotor diameters of 80 meters, which would be a HUGE screen and quite expensive.

Those shields would be vast. And shields that big will be a significant increase in wind resistance. The pylon would take a heavy strain and possibly break. The pivot point would be too weak and break.

All in all. No it is not possible. No more possible than a ladder to the moon. Theoretically yes, but in real life??

The problem with wind energy: on the days when you need the most electricity (when it is REALLY hot), you have the least wind (heat is caused by high pressure troughs, which by nature have no wind as they are exerting their energy outwards into surrounding low pressure areas...via the wind they are creating).

To make wind energy really work, you have to either find a way to store it, or find a way to send it somewhere that it is needed at that moment. Where I live we have thousands and thousand of windmills. Tens and tens of thousands. Everywhere. So much so that they account for about half the room nights in the local hotels annually (for the last several years). Wind energy is big business here. And you would be surprised how often that energy generated, and then just released into the ground. On many it is is because they haven't put in the high energy transmission lines to extract the energy back out into the grid. On some, however, it is because there is just nowhere to send the energy.

And from the ERCOT (the electric reliability council) level, they are an obnoxious fad. Wind energy is unreliable (for the reasons mentioned above), and require that the coal generators still be run at an idle so that reliable energy is still ensured should wind energy not meet the needs at any individual moment (since they don't store that wind energy in any form....no capacitor, no battery, it is either on or off, depending on if the wind is blowing on the windmill). So even when the wind is blowing hard, you still have your generators running, waiting for the wind to stop.

One more thing about wind:

Wind energy, like oil, competes with food resources. Roscoe, TX is a good example of this. It is a VERY small west Texas town that is nothing but cotton patch and oil field. When wind took off, the farmers there were made intstantly rich. They get something like 25k/year lease fees + a percent royalty for each wind mill. The benefit to them is to get as many windmills as they can on their land....giving up agricultural land in the process.

Just like when you set up a pad and drill an oil well, you are seeing farmers and ranchers dedicating some of their land to energy production. Very similar to planting crops to extract fuel alcohol from.

Current wind turbines make noise, they allegedly kill bats and birds, they give off low frequency pollution, they cast maddening shadows on homes/roads, and they can chuck ice.


Their efficiency is up for debate and when the wind speeds up too much they have to shut them down which means something else needs to pick up the slack while it is down. so you either use existing power generating sources or you have to provide a back up during downtimes due to too much wind or too little wind. IF you have to build a back up for them you just added more pollution creating facilities.

it costs a crap ton to install these things. 1mil for just one and that is the industrial size one. smaller ones can costs hundreds of thousands to maybe just thousands for installation. it is necessary to install quite a bit of them to make it worth while so you will have an army of these things and they still require something to pick up the slack when the wind is slow.

I think solar is better imo although the efficiency on that is not quite there yet at least the last time I was really involved with it.

In both you are depending too much on the weather... and weather men are only correct about the weather what % of the time? Do you really want to depend on the weather for steady power??

I looked into this and visited a few wind "farms" in ohio. They are pretty noisy and they seem like quite a monstrosity. After visiting a few and studying up on them my friend and I backed away from them. The only good thing about them is the government subsidies. The tax payers end up paying most of it.

any who , hope this design addresses many of the draw backs of the current model. Hopefully its efficiency and effectiveness goes up in time.

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
If we were to have wind turbines we would have had them decades ago and by now everyone would have one. We will be dependent on oil based energy as long as there is a profit to be made.

No, you will be dependant on oil based technology as long as you choose not to change. You are ultimately responsible.

A lot of people could build a wind generator, they just choose the easy option and don't.

I love this old man's idea and I'm going to have a go myself, mainly to compare the noise levels.

Another advanced turbine design;



Cleveland State University wind turbines at Progressive Field are overachievers

The four mounted turbines are generating more than 4.5 times as much energy than if the turbines were standing alone, according to data collected by Cleveland State University.

In a quarterly technical performance report submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy on July 30, Rashidi reported that at a wind speed of 11 miles per hour the tower's four turbines generated 1,288 watts of energy, compared to a combined 200 watts of energy that would be generated by four stand-alone turbines, as calculated by turbine manufacturer.

A wind speed of 18 miles per hour generated 6,143 watts of energy from CSU's tower structure, compared to 1,412 from four stand-alone turbines. The report said the results, from April 1 through June 30, show the average electrical power generated by the spiral turbine was 4.64 times as much as conventional turbines.

"That is what the spiral does to the wind," Rashidi said. "It funnels more air."

The turbine is expected to generate about 40,000 kilowatt-hours per year, roughly the amount of energy needed to power four homes, Indians officials said. The ballpark uses about 17 million kilowatt-hours a year.

I'd like to see the smaller, more compact design (the 6-ft tall one), that sounds about perfect for providing the electrical needs for a small, remote cabin.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Bird and bat deaths due wind turbines is very much overblown.

Looks like windows and powerlines are thousands of times more deadly.
I think he's got a great idea and why not just put a wire mesh cone on the front so birds can't possibly fly in to and destroy the turbines blades?

I would love to see a statistic on how many birds are killed in oil slicks haha. Irony it's best!

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Bird and bat deaths due wind turbines is very much overblown.

Looks like windows and powerlines are thousands of times more deadly.
I think he's got a great idea and why not just put a wire mesh cone on the front so birds can't possibly fly in to and destroy the turbines blades?

I'm not doubting the relative harmlessness of wind turbines one bit but your use if this graphic is misleading. According to the chart, buildings/windows are account for three to four orders of magnitude more fatalities than turbines per 10,000, yet how many more buildings/windows are there than wind turbines?

reply to post by john_bmth

I'm not doubting the relative harmlessness of wind turbines one bit but your use if this graphic is misleading. According to the chart, buildings/windows are account for three to four orders of magnitude more fatalities than turbines per 10,000, yet how many more buildings/windows are there than wind turbines?

You gave me an idea.
We should mount large three-bladed wind generators adjacent to large buildings to chop up the birds and protect the buildings. Think how much money it would save in replacement glass.

reply to post by john_bmth


How many Tall enough building are there compared to windmills and then you may be averaging the same.

Office buildings mostly made of glass for views is what is the bigger factor for bird building deaths.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by john_bmth

 

I'm not doubting the relative harmlessness of wind turbines one bit but your use if this graphic is misleading. According to the chart, buildings/windows are account for three to four orders of magnitude more fatalities than turbines per 10,000, yet how many more buildings/windows are there than wind turbines?

You gave me an idea.
We should mount large three-bladed wind generators adjacent to large buildings to chop up the birds and protect the buildings. Think how much money it would save in replacement glass.

Excellent solution. We could take it one step further and mount wind turbines to birds. Win-win situation if you ask me.

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrented
reply to post by john_bmth

 

How many Tall enough building are there compared to windmills and then you may be averaging the same.

Which country are you in? I'm having a hard time believing this stat. Do you have any numbers handy or location you could point me to?

Office buildings mostly made of glass for views is what is the bigger factor for bird building deaths.

Sure, but that's not my point. It's like the statistic about planes being safer than cars using deaths per 100,000. Now, planes are actually safer than cars, but the use of deaths per 100,000 is not the way to demonstrate this as it is a misleading statistic.

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrented
reply to post by john_bmth

 

How many Tall enough building are there compared to windmills and then you may be averaging the same.

Office buildings mostly made of glass for views is what is the bigger factor for bird building deaths.

Why not attach them directly to power pylons.

Win/win.