Wind turbine? Does it make sense?

[EddieWalker]

I remember in the 1980's when PCs were about $4000 to $5000, a good 13" monitor was $700 and a laser printer was close to $2000. After you got all of that, you could even get a Hayes 1200 baud modem for $500 and log into bulletin boards; no internet.

My, my, my. . . how times have changed. You can now spend $1000 or less and be on the internet and hooked up to multiple cheap devices via USB or Ethernet, even wireless.

I think alternative energy sources are in their infancy and those brave people who spend the big $$$ to be the pioneers are to be commended. However, I think the technology and the price is far too high. My grandkids and their children may be the benefactors of that technology. Today, I think conservation and reducing energy consumption are the best bets for saving money and resources.

Jim,

Excellent point. The US Government and Military had allot to do with our modern day internet, but only in it's infancy. The real miracle that made the home computer so affordable and advanced was that the private sector go a hold of the technology and ran with it. No grants, no congressman, no politicians or subsidiaries. Just people figuring it out and selling it to those who wanted it and were willing to pay the asking price. Computers, cell phones and digital cameras are just a small part of what they come up with, and none of it was because the government.

Wind technology has hit a wall and it doesn't seem to be going anywhere. The same it true for just about all of the alternative energy sector. They don't have to make a product that works because they are getting paid to make something that doesn't work. If there was no government money involved. only those who really had a passion for it would be working on it. Right now, big corporations are making money selling a product that does not work, will not last and isn't even practical. The spend almost as much money on marketing this outdated technology as the put into making it.

Except for some minor refinements and small innovations to a small part of what they do, windmills haven't progressed much since the 1070's. Of course, why should they? Why put money and effort into making something work when you can sell it like it is?

Eddie

 

[RonMar]

Yes, these are all good points here.

I believe net metering would work. I think that it is just about the physical properties of the meter. That is, I believe all 'older' meters will run in either direction, but I might be wrong - any comments on this?

As far as getting paid for excess energy. Not sure on this one. There is a potential problem here. One fellow told me that they were legally required to pay him, but refused and it took him a year in court to make it work. Major hassle factor there.

Regarding guy wires. I am on enough land that if it fell, it would stay well within the bounds of my property. Besides, the monopole structure are like what you see on the high power line towers. They are really sturdy and designed not to need the extra wires. Although they are about 4x more expensive than guy wired towers. A 60 ft tower needs about 10 yd of concrete - 8x8x8 foundation.

What an excellent point about 'no ugliness restrictions on high v. power lines'. It would be hard to counter the argument that a windmill is any worse than an ugly string of HV towers twice as tall with wires and insulators hanging all over!

Maintenance might be a factor - need to learn about - most turbines come with a 5 yr warranty - at least that's a start.

Re. batteries, if you can do net metering, you can do without batteries. If you want to be totally grid-free, battery systems appear to me to be a high cost and require management. Last time I looked into it, was around $5 per watt to set up a battery bank with charge regulation and inverters to go totally off-grid. That doubles the cost of solar and triples the cost of intermediate size wind power.

Good Questions. As far as net metering goes, your wind turbine will probably generate AC power, as the line losses using DC down the tower from the turbine location to the meter will probably be pretty high. The AC it generates, will not be anything that your house can use however. It will probably be several phases of possibly high voltage AC that will get converted to DC at the control panel/meter. Like the power comming in from the grid, it is more efficient to move Killowatts over any distance using higher voltage/lower current. It also requires smaller wires to do so.

Once convertd to DC using a simple diode bank and some filtration, it is just like a solar electric plant. The DC current is fed into an inverter that converts it to 120V/240VAC. The inverter used in a solar system must deal with a varying DC voltage provided by the panels in varying light conditions. Since the wind will never be blowing at the same speed, the wind turbine will also be providing a varying power supply which the inverter will automatically turn into proper line voltage/current. This is probably the best way to get to proper line voltage in a small scale plant. Every conversion has a cost in efficiency. The big commercial wind generators make proper AC on the tower by controlling rotor RPM with prop pitch. Less conversions = higher efficiency/output for a given wind speed.

This is all done without you having to buy any batteries. You also won't spin your meter backwards, you will get a new/second meter that will count the KWH you put back into the grid. Your main meter minus the feedback meter = the ammount you save, or the ammount the utility company owes you. Depending on how your utility is working it, you eiter get paid for the power you feed back into the grid beyond what you used over that time period, or you get a credit to your account for KWH generated. So if you don't use much energy in the summer, and are feeding a surplus of wind power back into the grid, that credit can go towards next winters electric bill. Basically using the grid as a battery for your own needs.

The inverter is designed to be anti-islanding. What this means is that if the grid feeding your home fails, the inverter will shut down also to keep from energizing the electrical lines that lineman are possibly working on. You may be in the middle of a wind storm, and your house will not be powered by it if the grid is down. I am starting to see more grid-tied systems that offer a battery backup, but IMO, they are prohibitively expensive for a battery bank of any usefull size. A small generator with a transfer switch makes much more sense to me for emergency power. Batteries are for people who can't get the grid to their door at a reasonable cost.

 

[BobRip]

I wonder if a relatively small battery that would give you even an hour of storage would help. With the wind blowing you could stretch this to several hours, and then recharge for a while. I did no math on this, it just seems like a waste to have no offline capability with the windmill sitting there.

 

[RonMar]

I wonder if a relatively small battery that would give you even an hour of storage would help. With the wind blowing you could stretch this to several hours, and then recharge for a while. I did no math on this, it just seems like a waste to have no offline capability with the windmill sitting there.

Watts are Watts regardless of the source. Power in Watts(P) = Current (I) in amps times Voltage(E) or P= I times E A 12V car battery for instance is about 50 AH of capacity. Put 4 in series and you have 48VDC@50 AH. 1000W divided by 48V = 20A of current, not including the 85-90% efficiency of the inverter and other losses. These losses would probably push the current draw closer to 25A to feed 1KW, so those batteries would last about 2 hours feeding a 1KW load. Unfortunatly, discharging at that is pretty hard on the batteries. This would ultimately shorten their life. For a backup application, that might not be too bad. If you have a lot of wind, you might get quite a bit of run time out of them Is 1KW enough power? Around my house, it would be pretty usefull to keep the lights on and the pellet stove running for a few hours. But that battery backup option and the batteries for even a small bank is probably going to add close to $1k to the project price. Is it worth it at that cost for just a few hours of power worst case. That is why I think the generator makes more sense.

 

[schmism]

so those batteries would last about 2 hours feeding a 1KW load.

what your missing is the fact that the same storm that knocked out your power, is blowing hard enough to generate max output from your turbine. Small residential turbines usually run the 1.5Kw to 5Kw. So if the storm continues to blow for another hr your outputting (at min) 1.5Kw for that hr needing 0w of battery.

You likely didnt consider a turbine if your area didnt receive regular wind in the first place so the idea that its puting something out (even 200w) for the rest of the time your power is out will extend that relatively small battery battery bank for significantly longer period.

 

[Patriotic Stabilist]

My understanding is most of the wind turbines we are getting are made in India. They have had major major problems with them, stress cracks, failures. The company is replacing and fixing the issues but there are so many I wonder how they stay in business. I guess all kinds of issues about them working. I don't have the articles but this has been covered several times in the WSJ. I don't know if any are produced in the US.

 

[buckeyefarmer]

RonMar has nailed it. batteries adds much to the cost, makes a payback pretty much nil. plus batteries don't last long. The skystream generates AC, back to the meter. either you use it or it goes back to the utility for credit. I'm not sure the utility buys it at the same rate that you are buying from them, probably less. In either case, the skystream is made to shut down when utility goes down, in order to prevent backfeed on the system, so if you lose power, you also lose windmill power.
There are quite a few skystreams going up near me in another county. my county still doesn't know what they are going to do with them.

 

[Scooby074]

My understanding is most of the wind turbines we are getting are made in India. They have had major major problems with them, stress cracks, failures. The company is replacing and fixing the issues but there are so many I wonder how they stay in business. I guess all kinds of issues about them working. I don't have the articles but this has been covered several times in the WSJ. I don't know if any are produced in the US.

I think that the turbines in question were made by the indian firm Suzlon. Suzlon purchased the German firm Repower and a Belgan gearbox manufacturer to improve their product. I understand these failures involved only one model of turbine which is no longer produced and the company is in the process of replacing the potentially defective blades.

Part of the blame rests on the utilities too. Sulzon used cheap manufacturing in asia and india to undercut the mainstream manufacturers. They bought these turbines from Suzlon at a considerable cost savings (around 20%) over Vestas or other established manufacturer. Penny wise, pound foolish.

Of course the media and the anti-wind types pick up on this story and broadcast it. They tar all wind turbines with the same brush. You cant compare old (1970's) high speed turbines, like the ones in California, or the poorly made ones from india to who knows what standards, to a modern, slow speed European turbine like a Vestas or Enercon. Ive personally been directly under several of them and they hardly make a sound and are perfectly safe. Id have no problems with one on my property if i had the necessary wind.

GE is producing turbines in the US. Vestas turbines are made in Denmark and the US. Enercon is Germany i believe. Most of the major manufacturers are out of Europe.

 

[Kfbeal]

It's imperative that you check with your utility to see if they any riders that require you to have certain equipment, insurance, etc. We require the disconnect switch to protect our lineman since the transformers work in both directions. Generators are a big source of accidents for lineworkers, and this new solar and wind will be another hurdle.

On the .12 / kwh I would use about 30-50% of that number that you would get paid for. You have no transmission or distribution overhead so you will only be paid the Generation of energy costs which it normally around 1/2. Your bills are normally (when unbundled) shown as Generation, Transmission and Distribution. Most power companies rates are due to 75% Generation and Transmission costs.

We've done quite a bit of research on this and the pay-off doesn't seem worth it.

 

[milkman]

So, let's look at an example - suppose you spend $16,000 on a 4KW system. Your tax credit would be $4,800 - lowering the immediate cost of the system to $11,200. Now, in addition, you can deduct the entire cost of the system as it relates to your business (your farm, etc.).

I may be wrong, but I think a tax credit is simply the amount you wouldn't have to pay tax on, I don't think you get a check for $4800. Someone tried to sell a $5000 tax credit to buy health insurance and let it remain terribly misleading, noone was going to get $5000 to buy ins. but it sounds good.