Biggest Installation of Silent Urban-Styled Wind Turbines

[n2doc]

Wind may be picking up faster than any other energy source, but harnessing its power is largely left to remote wind farms that not everyone is crazy about. Keen to see the wind change in the way wind power is perceived on the street, Quietrevolution (QR) has done a makeover on the design of wind turbines, so they’ll look, sound, and work better in urban environments. No storms kicked up over them spoiling the view. No waking the neighbours with that ghastly noise. No worries getting the best out of wind in built-up areas.

Thanks to the aerodynamics of its vertical-axis wind turbine (VAWT) design, Quietrevolution has trademarked that most valuable of commodities in a world dominated by din: near silence. According to their website, those elegant S-shaped rotor blades shed noise and minimise vibration. Compare your typical horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWTs), which sometimes hit the headlines - denied planning permission due to local opposition.

If the QR turbines are to brighten not be a blight on the urban landscape, its display turbines may have some say on the matter. Though still a product in in its early stages of development, the idea is that as the blades revolve, attached LEDs will light up in sequence, creating a screen that depicts colourful and moving images mid-air. Nifty, no? Well even if advertising here proves less illuminating to onlookers, people should at least be enlightened by displayed messages on climate change, or the turbines spinning as works of art in themselves.
Street cred from neat LEDs? Light Emitting Diodes to create dazzling displays


more at link:
http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/sciencetech/biggest-installation-of-silent-urban-styled-wind-turbines/4721

[Historic NY]

1. I like the vertical-axis wind turbine (VAWT) design, it is cleaner

in appearence. Just a thought with all those damn cell phone towers out there this design could be melded in with them, producing the power to run them. Those big prop ones do make a 'big' impact on the landscape.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. One of these on every utility pole across the country and we're

done.

[phantom power]

3. done?

[HysteryDiagnosis]

6. Done worrying about where our next watt fix is going to come

from... green or not.

[Gregorian]

10. Nice idea. But these put out DC.

I should read the article. But I can say with pretty good certainty that these would require an inverter to make the kind of power we put on the grid. That's one of the problems we face with all of these alternative energy items. An inverter for every few hundred poles? That might work.

Sorry. I know it's silly to be pedantic. But there are some big details in this new energy scheme. And given a few more years even those may be overcome.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

12. If the turbine is small.. and small it will be, you would only need a

couple thousand watt inverter to seal the deal... around a hundred bucks or so.

[Gregorian]

15. It's not the financial cost.

One has to look at the overall picture.

[shraby]

4. Could those also be attached to fences in the counryside

and chain link fences in urban areas as well? For instance, we have a chain link fence enclosing almost an acre here in town. There would be space enough for quite a few of those equally spaced around the top of it.

[n2doc]

5. 2 worries- birds and maintenance

Birds love to use posts and other high objects for resting places. And if we make a bunch of these, won't there be a lot of routine maintenance needed to be done. One advantage of the big ones is fewer devices to look after?

They would seem to have a place in some areas, though, and look cool as a plus.

[WhiteTara]

13. probably not high enough n/t

[mopinko]

7. we could use those in chicago

i think this guy has a prettier version now. i can't find a picture.



we do have some wind projects going here, and we do have a lot of wind compared to most of illinois. definitely a place for this stuff.

[dpbrown]

8. We've already got more light pollution than we need, otherwise a great idea it seems

How soon can I put them on my house?

[silverweb]

9. I LOVE the turbines...

...but have to think about the light show. That could be used sparingly and very creatively as a beautiful asset to an urban landscape, or it could be a complete blight.

We'll just have to wait and see. It will be very interesting to watch this unfold.

[lib_wit_it]

14. I don't care for the light show idea at all. The turbines themselves appeal to me visually far

more than the lantern-looking light show ones.

[kristopher]

11. Wind power 101

The closer a turbine is to ground obstructions, the less wind is available for power. The "big ones" are big, first and foremost, to get them up high where the effects of drag on the wind are reduced.

The amount of energy in wind isn't linear. For example, a doubling of wind speed doesn't equal a doubling of power, it results in an eightfold increase in power. Conversely, this means a halving of wind speed results in an eightfold DECREASE in power. (added on edit: this is poorly phrased, but you get my meaning)

The "big ones" are tapping into a LOT more energy than is available at rooftop (or telephone pole top) heights.

This means that no matter the design of these small turbines, the basic energy resource at the height it is feasible to mount them is very low.

Consequently, when you look at the amount of electricity they produce over their lifespan and compare it with their costs, the electricity is EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE.

This product is a gimmick with little intrinsic value as a source of energy.

[Dogmudgeon]

16. If wind turbines were invisible, no one would build them

The only reason they do get built is that they are highly visible. People see them and get a feel-good thrill (like Tweety during an Obama speech) that, unfortunately, just sedates them.

"Look! A wind turbine! All our problems are over!"

There are several points on the Pennsylvania highway system where PECO's and PG&E's turbines are highly visible. The same is probably true in your state. We can buy Pennsylvania "Green Electricity" that's all of about 2% generated by wind technology. (None, so far, by solar technology, except maybe one or two test runs per year -- which they advertise heavily. Problems and failures are ignored.)

It's doubly sad. First, because the larger wind turbines actually can contribute to our energy demands, approximately 20% of our primary electric demand before optimization. Second, by sedating people into a state of cozy non-concern, the fact that we need some rather big changes in our infrastructure and way of life remains below the proverbial radar.

New low-carbon energy production that isn't highly visible isn't being supported to any substantial degree.

--p!

[Nihil]

17. Uh ... what?

Don't get me wrong, I love VAWTs and getting one that is even quieter
by good design is a brilliant move but just *what* is the f*cking point
of using a VAWT to generate power then degrading the efficiency of said
VAWT and wasting some of that power by building in LEDs and lighting the
damn turbine up?

As someone upthread pointed out, there is no shortage of light pollution
at the moment anyway so why add more and, at the same time, degrade the
value of putting wind turbines on a building in the first place?

:banghead: