Go to Otherpower.com Home Page Go to Forcefield Shopping Cart Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page
Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Reviews - Diaries - Our Products
A Curiosity


By finnsawyer, Section Wind
Posted on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 05:24:03 PM MST
Some time ago I saw an article in the local paper.

A senior citizen's home in the Marquette area was going to use wind power to reduce their energy costs.  Two questions came to mind.  What about the noise and how exactly is any money going to be saved?  Well, now a local school district is contemplating the same.  Turns out the wind turbine is a vertical design and very quiet.  Ok, that takes care of the noise question.  How about the cost?  The unit is big, 66 feet in diameter, and produced by an outfit called Wind Stor.  Still, how does anyone make money, let alone save any?  The turbine is not owned by the school district.  It just pays for the electricity.  Turns out the company that will own the mill "offsets it's costs with money from a Michigan Public Services Grant".  In other words we taxpayers get to pay for at least part of it.  Hooray!  Michigan scores again!  One wonders what the true cost of those kwhrs will be, and how many kwhrs the same money would have bought off of the grid.  Well, it will be interesting to see how this business fares over the years.    
A Curiosity | 26 comments (26 topical)

History (3.00 / 0) (#1)
by wdyasq on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 10:56:29 AM MST

I hope they require the installing company show a picture of a successful VAWT, especially a large one.  I know I've never seen one.  

Before you folks start your flame wars - I think 100kW for size and 5 years 95% uptime is a successful mill. Please post pictures in a JPG format and give location and ownership of mill if possible.

Ron
Adventure is just bad planning." -- Roald Amundsen



Re: History (3.00 / 0) (#2)
by monte350c on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 04:57:17 PM MST

Agreed. Lots of people have tried this/been down that road previously.

There's a news release about this company, and their 100kw installation at a university in Quebec. But try as I might I can't seem to find any photos of it.

The news releases contain the 'forward looking statements' disclaimer.

If it is as good as they say, why no photos on their web site?

read more:

http://www.canadanewswire.org/en/releases/orgDisplay.cgi?okey=63011&pos=0

Ted.

[ Parent ]



Re: History (3.00 / 0) (#3)
by marv on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 05:25:05 PM MST

Found some photos.

 http://web.mckenziebay.com/sites.htm

[ Parent ]



Re: History (3.00 / 0) (#4)
by Clifford on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 05:40:05 PM MST

There is a AVI movie on the McKenzie website:

http://web.mckenziebay.com/

This PDF has a photo of the Quebec Turbine:

http://c-westcode.com/Library/WindStor%20PowerPoint%20Rev%20%209-1-05%20(2).pdf

Page 7.

Most of the other photos are simulations though.

[ Parent ]



Re: History (3.00 / 0) (#6)
by wdyasq on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 07:17:41 PM MST

Ted,

A little search and I found this: 'as a source to sell and market
carbon dioxide and all other bundled environmental attributes which are
expected to be generated from the production of renewable energy at
WindStor(SM) installations.'

One of the sneaky things about wind turbines is since they are 'green' industries get 'credits' for generating capacity and can then use more coal and oil fired capacity on the CAPACITY, not the actual output of the mills.  There are windfarms which are well over the capacity of the infrastructure to distribute what they produce. Still, the owners get 'credit' and are able to sell those green credits to other industries.  Those 'other industries' can continue to polute because there is green capacity offsetting their polution.  I have a well-founded suspicion the credits are more valuable than the electricity generated.

If I were playing craps, I'd bet the project is a scam on 'environmental attributes' tied to the 'expected' generation.  If the product does work, that will be a bonus.  

I still don't think the product is 5 years old or has anywhere near 95% uptime.

Ron
Adventure is just bad planning." -- Roald Amundsen
[ Parent ]



Re: History (3.00 / 0) (#7)
by monte350c on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 07:51:43 PM MST

Ron,

I suspect your view on the credits is correct.

It would be a lot better to give the credits to ACTUAL RE produced than as a reward for doing the opposite.

I finished the last of the articles on the site I linked to above.

There is mention of gov't money:

http://www.canadanewswire.org/en/releases/archive/September2003/22/c3366.html

Hmmm...

Ted.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#5)
by motorhead2 on Wed Dec 07, 2005 at 05:48:05 PM MST

Wow"Finsawyer I would love to see a pic of that creature.Do you think its a darrius or sav design.Im just trying to picture the rotor I know you can make them strong and heavy without hurting performance much.That has to cost a fortune to build.And why not have multiple smaller more manageable ones.The cost should be open to the public if its a school.
Mark


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#8)
by CG on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 03:30:52 AM MST

I know it is easy to be sceptical about the project, but I have been following it for over year and I think it is beginning to look like it's not pie in the sky. Forget about the wind turbine look at the way it is being sold - or not sold in this case. A customer does not have to buy the Windstor turbine, it's the electricity generated that has to be bought. It's a very innovative way to sell renewable energy, but it must be a financing nightmare for Mckenzie Bay. I really believe this turbine is the acceptable face of urban wind energy, I hope it is marketed in the UK.



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#9)
by finnsawyer on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:49:21 AM MST

Yeah, I'm skeptical.  Too many things have gone up in smoke over the years.  My real concern is what happens if after a few years the company goes bankrupt.  This thing is no longer serviced and stops working and becomes a danger to life and limb with 200 kids playing under or near it.  I see no reason these things couldn't be erected away from buildings, but by a school?  It is also instructive that no engineering data appears to be available to the public.  If so, that means they are buying a 'pig in a poke'.  Sure, the cheap power is attractive to the school (but maybe not to the taxpayer), but the thing has to be torn down at the end of its life time, whenever that may be.  Sounds like a performance bond is needed here.  If something falling off of the structure hurt a member of my family, I'd sue their socks off.  If something like that happens, it could mean the end of the company sooner, rather than later.  As it stands now, the information is too sketchy and too tenuous.
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#11)
by CG on Fri Dec 09, 2005 at 04:03:24 AM MST

Well, if Mckenzie Bay is out to con people they are certainly going the wrong way about it, one of their first customers is a county sherif's office jail.

[ Parent ]


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#12)
by finnsawyer on Fri Dec 09, 2005 at 09:13:12 AM MST

I'm not saying they're trying to con anybody.  I'm just saying their marketing strategy creates inherent dangers.  I wouldn't want one of these anywhere near my house.  At some point one of these is going to fail.  It's in the nature of the beast.  Then one or more of the airfoils will be flying through the air at 50 to 60 miles an hour.  How far could one of those penetrate in a house or automobile?  The fact that they recommend putting these things on roofs indicates that they don't understand potential failure modes.  There are places where these could be put, away from people, where people don't go during high winds.  There the units could prove themselves.  As an example, west of here along M-26 there is a small substation under a transmission line in an unpopulated area.  Put some units a mile or so off the road on one of the ridges in the area.  As far as being conned, it's beginning to look like the bureaucrats are starting to con themselves.  The chairman of the Michigan Public Service Commission has "come out in favor of any energy source that reduces the state's demand for electricity produced at plants using fossil fuels", apparently no matter what the cost.  I suggest he start by investigating the possibility of a hydro plant on the Salmon Trout River at Redridge, Michigan (just in case this gets called to his attention).
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#13)
by CG on Sat Dec 10, 2005 at 03:28:56 AM MST

Many of the users of this site install wind turbines on their property, some of those turbines fail, are you saying they shouldn't do this? If you are we might just a well pack up working with wind energy, we can't all station our turbines miles away from civilisation for safety sake. I'm afraid you will have to get used to the idea of having this potential danger near you, micro generation is beginning to take off; here in the UK we have Windsave, Swift, and Eurowind are all proposing the siting of wind turbines on houses. I personnally don't like the idea of attaching a wind turbine to my house, but as I understand it your objection is not only to this but also having it sited in an urban area.

I do agree with you on the dangers of taking up a contract with Mckenzie Bay. This company, with its Windstor project, is in effect becoming a small utility company. This is an business they probably know very little about. Customers will have to sign a 20 year contract with them, and I doubt if Mckenzie Bay will not have sold out to a large utility company before then. What happens if the new owners are not so keen on this type of energy supply? But at least Mckenzie Bay is dealing with professional people in companies who should be able to read the small print. The Windsave and Swift turbines are being sold to house owners, and those house owners are probably being given grossly over optimistic performance figures for the returns on their investment in wind power.

[ Parent ]



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#14)
by finnsawyer on Sat Dec 10, 2005 at 09:06:07 AM MST

No, I'm not saying the users of this site should quit using wind power.  But it is well known that windmills fail.  Just look at some of the pictures that have appeared here.  If you put a wind mill up on your own property you are putting your own family somewhat at risk.  That is a risk you are free to take (in my opinion).  A blade from a horizontal mill will probably not go too far.  If my neighbor, a thousand feet across the field, were to put up a horizontal mill, I would not be too concerned.  On the other hand, if something from the mill hurt a member of my family, he better have good insurance.  These windstor mills are a different kind of animal.  They are an "egg-beater" design.  The blades are very thin and are subjected to varying forces as they rotate.  Failure due to metal fatigue can not be ruled out.  Putting one of these by a school or where people tend to congregate makes no sense.

It is possible to mitigate the failure impact of a horizontal type mill by fastening the blade tips to a ring and/or putting a shroud around the blade.  This might also result in less noise.  For a take on this check out the new Virginia class of submarines.  Would you be willing to invest in a new type of wind turbine that doesn't have these noise and failure problems?
GeoM
[ Parent ]



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#16)
by rotornuts on Sat Dec 10, 2005 at 12:19:28 PM MST

I think the critical component to operating a machine in an urban environment is dilligence in the maintenance and inspection department. There is no reason to fear safety if regular inspection is involved. I think by now the creators of eggbeater  darrieus machine are savy to the blade fatigue issue.

I would like to see a close up of the blade to lower support junction on the design in the pictures. It seems to me that by not binding the end of the blade it may allow the blade to flex more freely and lower the fatigue stresses somewhat.

Mike

[ Parent ]



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#17)
by finnsawyer on Sun Dec 11, 2005 at 09:28:18 AM MST

Are they going to take the blades down periodically and xray them?  If you've been following the threads of this posting, you are aware that no one has seen one of these things in operation at all.  They have not been proven, at least to the public.  Metal fatigue is always going to be an issue, anyway.  All I can do is voice my concerns.  Other than that time will tell.  It is not acceptable that even one child should die because one of these windmills was built by a school!
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#19)
by rotornuts on Sun Dec 11, 2005 at 11:46:29 PM MST

Who says the blades need be constructed from metal. Composites have been a reality for some time now unlike back in the 70's and 80's when the eggbeater aquired it's bad reputation.

Mike

[ Parent ]



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#20)
by CG on Mon Dec 12, 2005 at 02:53:23 AM MST

It's just not true that no one has seen this machine in operation, it has been on test at Queebec University for over fourteen months. This is independent testing, and so far the results have been above expectations. Some of the engineers on this project were part of the team that worked on the Canadian 4MW Darrieus, so they ought to know what they are doing.

As for the dangers for school children, they have more chance of being shot by their classmates and other gun nuts than being injured by wind turbines.

[ Parent ]



cheap pot shots (3.00 / 0) (#21)
by wdyasq on Tue Dec 13, 2005 at 08:21:06 AM MST

Yep. 'As for the dangers for school children, they have more chance of being shot by their classmates and other gun nuts than being injured by wind turbines.'

Or getting run over by the school bus.  Or getting killed in sports. All of which are not related to nuts with guns.  

"Some of the engineers on this project were part of the team that worked on the Canadian 4MW Darrieus, so they ought to know what they are doing." - well they sure know what doesn't work long term.  14 months is not long term testing - IMO.

Ron
Adventure is just bad planning." -- Roald Amundsen
[ Parent ]



Re: cheap pot shots (3.00 / 0) (#22)
by finnsawyer on Tue Dec 13, 2005 at 09:13:33 AM MST

I don't get some of this.  What does kids being shot at or near school, or being run over by a bus have to do with this?  There is a child living in the area who is paralyzed as the result of being hit by a driver while getting off of a school bus, as he drove around the stopped bus.  A real tragedy.  He violated the law, and I thought he got off too easily.  While accidents do happen, I don't see how violations of the law should enter this discussion.  Now, the State takes a real interest in our safety.  I have to install three Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters in my entry panel at a cost of $45.00 per instead of the normal $3.50 circuit breakers, because somebody decided that this new technology will protect me from a class of fires that occurs one time in what, ten thousand?  So, why are they turning a blind eye to the dangers from this proposed 'pig in a poke'?
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: cheap pot shots (3.00 / 0) (#23)
by TomW on Tue Dec 13, 2005 at 10:44:00 AM MST

fin;

I "think" the cheap pot shot was the comment about guns in the hands of children. Indeed you can be killed by many things and I find it unlikely that safety can be legislated whether it be traffic laws, electrical safety or gun laws. I find it rather ludicrous to have untested technology of a large rotating nature with a fall zone that includes a concentration of humans, especially children.

Personally, I took the gun comment as a cheap shot at legal gun ownership but thats just me. Everyone has their agenda, that is clear.

Could be wrong tho.

Cheers.

TomW

The Truth is the Truth, even if no one believes it; and a lie is a lie even if everyone believes it


[ Parent ]



Re: cheap pot shots (3.00 / 0) (#24)
by CG on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 03:27:31 AM MST

When somebody posts on this board that they have built out of odds and ends a Piggott style turbine everybody rushes to congratulate them on a job well done, nobody asks the builder of that turbine of his engineering experience or if the turbine has had "long term testing". But when a group of qualified engineers from reputable companies build and test in a university a wind turbine all sorts of angst comes to the fore. I have to say I do admire the people who build they own turbines, I just want a bit of common sense here, these Windstor turbines are not going to be errected without some sort of control by local authorities.

It's all about what society a person grows up in. Look how you have risen to the bait about guns - and I consider one child killed by  another with an easily aquired gun rather an expensive shot not a cheap one - but then I come from a different part of the world. In years to come there may be many Windstor or other types of fairly large wind turbines in urban areas and people will think no more of it than you think of owning a gun. But rest assured if one of them fails causing serious loss of life before they catch on that will end urban siting of large wind turbines, but no matter how many people are killed by guns not too much is done about it where you are, but then that's your affair and not mine.

Please give Windstor a chance, I am pretty sure it's an important addition to wind energy.

[ Parent ]



Re: cheap pot shots (3.00 / 0) (#26)
by finnsawyer on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 08:19:54 AM MST

I have indicated that I am willing to give them a chance.  Many years of operation in an unpopulated area like that site along M-26.
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#10)
by IntegEner on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:07:32 AM MST

McKenzie Bay has been around for years and they are mentioned on my website as "Dermond, Inc." in the verticals wind turbines section of one of the pages. It sort of prompts me to cast an aspersion or two on typical attitudes to be found about these and other innovative devices like them. All these questions about costs, in particular. It is not cool to begrudge those who see a different reality their sources of income and funds.

My own motto is "many problems must be identified before they can be solved". It takes good analysis along the lengths of wind turbine blades inch by inch to understand how they are driven by the wind. The haste wind energy has often shown to get some current flowing into the batteries with something easy and cheap, being that the wind is free, is just so much of "placing another point on the graph", or, in other words, the "TTTT" approach, i.e. "try this, try that".

The verticals are subject to an effectively reduced blade swept area since the rotor is not as efficient at its outermost fringes to the right and left as it is in the center dead on and everyone has always wondered why they cannot perform as well as the horizontals on a swept area basis. Ordinary calculus math finds a factor, 2/3, which must be applied to adjust for this. Verticals rotors must be one and a half times as large in their areas seen by the wind, therefore, as the horizontals rotors are just to start with.

They also have the serious handicap of requiring that the blades travel straight upwind right into the teeth of the wind during a portion of their rotation. Not only does the laminar flow see a high parasitic drag there but the slightest amount of flow separation and turbulence produced is directed straight back and acts as a brake, unlike the horizontals, wherein turbulence and stalling directs itself at right angles to the blade motion, keeping it from being as great a factor in inhibiting performance.

As one can see from the images of these Dermond turbines, the bent blades allow the stresses to be managed with blades that are super thin, something of an answer to the drag problem. Thinness doesn't work without blade chord width and so they have good blade chord width also.

Everyone on this discussion list who has followed my own comments knows that I am doing some work with small rotators, both of the horizontals type and verticals. I can mention here that recently the verticals rotator, whose rotor arms were purposely reduced in length to 9 inches long (rotor diameter 18 inches) ran at a high speed in 10 mph winds, fast enough to light the LED lights placed on the 3.5 inch diameter axial flux 3 phase PM alternator (purchased from Ed Lenz of WindStuffNow). It gave everyone here confidence that this effort is going in the right direction. It was really interesting to see these 22 inch long thin, doubled verticals blades, relying on only the lift principle turning at about 300 - 400 rpm. Photos taken with the digital camera, which has progressive scan (the image part above is at an earlier time than the image part below), show "twisted" blades due to this photo effect on their motion.

This particular test was done as a result of the confidence obtained from the previous test on a horizontals rotator with similar thin and doubled blades, which likewise ran at a high speed, higher than expected. It goes like that, one test providing support for the next.

These are just small rotators and only intended to light some diode lights or, later on, charge small Ni-Cad batteries for outdoor use and not for powering a home. We go where the electrical utilities are not able in these small usages. More "power" to McKenzie Bay and Dermond, though.

Anthony Chessick, trying to be a little less of the "Knucks"
www.integener.com



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#15)
by IntegEner on Sat Dec 10, 2005 at 09:31:33 AM MST

Happily, my wild and wonderful experimentation with bending aluminum roofing sheet metal that comes in 4" and 6" rolls in the hardware store to make blades that turn in the wind is beginning to result in my being able to light the little LED lights on the 7' tall lattice towers that otherwise are used for the decorative farm style windmills of Harbor Freight. The thin, double-bladed, verticals rotors designed this way also look attractive and professional due to the care taken in making straight lines and right angle corners, not to mention from applying some colorful, adhesive-backed paper to them.

This is going where no one seems to have gone before. I reasoned that the usual verticals blade profile of the symmetrical double convex shape had too many problems with it and so sort of split it in two lengthwise so that it has a top half and a bottom half. Each half then can be made from the thin sheets. Many difficulties and sore fingers later I have something that has been receiving support for its now apparent promise. In the context of these verticals that use the lift principle rather than being satisfied with Savonius-style flow capture these blades start up well and rotate faster than the wind velocity even on this small scale.

Elliott Bayly of the erstwhile World Power Technologies company of Duluth used to poke fun at something he called "Holy Grail" projects, a phrase of his own invention, I believe, for something most everyone in wind energy aspires to in one form or another (but a name like his "World Power" has always seemed a little overambitious as well). To get the wind in open spaces near a home or ranch to demonstrate just a bit of wind energy capability is hardly revolutionary technologically but I have hopes it just might find some market demand.

What was required was to understand what the blades were doing at each place along their rotational arcs and a concept of blade "pitch and offset" was determined as something necessary to gain the driving forces without the self-defeating aspects often found in this style of rotator.

The website will be updated soon to show these latest developments (again, no loudly trumpeted extraordinary energy production claimed here at all!).

Anthony Chessick, "Knuckleheads rule"
www.integener.com

[ Parent ]



Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#18)
by electrondady1 on Sun Dec 11, 2005 at 03:20:42 PM MST

don't for get this mighy windmill http://www.othttp://www.otherpower.com/images/scimages/2793/little_erma_004.avi

[ Parent ]


Re: A Curiosity (3.00 / 0) (#25)
by IntegEner on Wed Dec 14, 2005 at 07:38:09 AM MST

The link to "little erma 004 dot avi" doesn't seem to work on my PC. Anyone else have this problem? Would like to research this "mighty windmill". Thanks. AVC, www.integener.com

[ Parent ]


A Curiosity | 26 comments (26 topical)
Display: Sort:
Menu
· create account
· How to use the board
· FAQs
· search the board
· Google search the board

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Total Views
  165 Scoop users have viewed this posting.

Related Links
· Also by finnsawyer

Powered by Scoop
You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest © 2009 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!