Wind turbine? Does it make sense?

[dejswa]

Once a year, seems like I look at renewable energy sources and then I am disappointed because the up front cost never justifies the long term savings if one just looks at it from an economic point of view.

However, this year, with the new 'stimulus', I mean 'spending' bill, it appears that there are economic incentives that might finally tip the scales in favor of acting on the purchase of some sort of system.

The tax details are still not clear to me, but it seems that there is now an unlimited 30% tax credit for rural qualifying renewable energy investment (maybe urban also, but I will explain in a moment). In addition, one would get to deduct the cost of the equipment over time - what period of time I do not know.

This ad has some discussion of the current tax law:

Qualified Small Wind: Skystream 3.7 eligible for US tax credits

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.).

Let's say you are in the 25% tax level and you deduct it over 5 years (possibly earlier by accellerated depreciation). Then that is $3200 deduction per year, saving you $800 real dollars per year x 5 years.

Thus, over 5 years, you will initially pay $11,200, then get back another $4,000.

Now, let's say that your turbine really generates only 30% of the max power on the average. At $0.12hat is $1,261 in electricity saved or refunded per year, for a total of $6,307 over 5 years.

Thus you now have been refunded $10,307 of your remaining $11, 200 over 5 years!

And I am only looking at 5 years. In another year, you will have paid off the entire thing in terms of cumulative savings. Of course I am not looking at the time value of your money up front. Of course, you might have had that money in the stock market and then you would have lost half of it and still not have a wind turbine.

They are saying that the life of the larger turbines is 20 yrs and even then you still have the infrastructure (tower, wiring, inverters) in place.

Now, if that makes sense, take it one step further. A 4KW turbine costs about $4 per watt to install to the point of being ready to use. Not much better than solar. But if you look at larger units, you can approach $2 per watt if you bump up to 20KW turbines. Then you have to start looking at the whole thing as an investment.

That's a lot of money, but you recoup it after exactly 3 years at $2/watt plus now you have the turbine for electricity and future profit.

I recently viewed a 4KW system on a 60 ft monopole and I was impressed at how quiet and unobtrusive it was. It didn't seem as tall as I was expecting and with a 20 mph wind there was more noise from the wind than the turbine. I think a 20KW system would go on a 80 to 100 ft pole.

 

[cdaledave89]

I haven't checked into the new tax credits available now, but when I did this exercise last year it really didn't make any sense for me. Based on my usage (home, not farm), my electricity cost, and the cost of the turbine, it would take me 20 to 50+ years to get a payback. This didn't include the cost of money either. I could find a lot of other things to sink $16-$18k into.

-Dave

 

[dejswa]

Yes, I am wondering if I am doing calculations correctly.

Am assuming:

$4/watt up front, turn key cost.
30% efficiency on the turbine (that is, an average of 30% of max output)
30% uncapped federal tax credit
25% federal income tax bracket and that you can depreciate it totally over 5 yrs.
$0.12 per KWhr electricity cost and $0.12 per KWhr payment for uploading energy to the grid.

Possible problems would be anything that negates the above premises.

 

[dmccarty]

Are you even in an area that has enough wind to utilize a turbine? Does wind blow in your area for enough hours in the day and strong enough to make power?

Do you have space to put the turbine up high enough to catch the wind? Will the tower require cables to hold it steady and do you have the space for those cables? Other wise you might need a different type of tower meaning more expense.

I take it that the .12 KWH payment to upload to the grid is net metering and your utility actually pays the producer retail rates for power. My power company will do net metering but they don't pay me what power costs me. They would pay a few cents less than retail.

Later,
Dan

 

[riptides]

What Dan said on wind source, and I might add, did you factor in any maintenance?

What about factoring in energy stores? Like batteries?

Lastly, local regulations?

I am under of all things a visual easement on a property.

The funny part is we can see "new" 500Khv towers on parcels, they obviously don't fall under the same restrictions. So check your local regs.....

Good luck.

Can you keep us posted on your progress? I am all about options.

 

[RonMar]

You need a LOT of wind for a reasonable payback period(Greater than 15KT for sustained periods daily?). Enough wind that you complain about that dam wind on a daily basis is probably what you need. How to Site a Wind Turbine | eHow.com

As mentioned, tower and possible guys could be an issue. The wind noise from a tower and guys, as well as the blade noise of the rotor itself could also be a long term headache. With enough wind to be operating properly, the rotor will make some noise.

 

[dejswa]

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.

 

[schmism]

As mentioned, tower and possible guys could be an issue. The wind noise from a tower and guys, as well as the blade noise of the rotor itself could also be a long term headache. With enough wind to be operating properly, the rotor will make some noise.

this is the most common objection i hear from "people"

These are usually people that have never stood under a small scale turbine.

Takeing it from someone that has actually stood under a small scale turbine on a 20mph day for some time, its no more noticeable than the highway out front and certainly less annoying than aircraft over head or the trains that roll by on the tracks.

 

[Bedlam]

You might also check your local town or city for the taxation.
My town has gone 'public' with the word that if someone should add a ,say 30,000 solar system , their valuation will increase proportionally.
so say that small mobile here is valued at 15,000 and gets a solar remake. its now worth 45,ooo for tax purposes.
It doesn't make sense to me to penalize but thats how they view it.

 

[EddieWalker]

The numbers sound good, but are based on returns that just might not be there.

A very good friend of mine owns a crane business. Before that, he was in the crane repair business and had the contract for two companies that owned the wind farms on the Altamont Pass in California. It's a very big wind farm. They went bankrupt because they couldn't afford to keep the windmills working. Rumor has it that newer turbines take less maintenance, and since he no longer has anything to do with those wind farms, I don't know for sure if it's true or not. I was there last year and was shocked to see how many of them had fallen over and had lost their blades. It's a mess.

From what I understand, you only generate electricity at certain wind speeds. It's very rare to find a place with consistent wind at the right speed. Then storing the electricity becomes an even bigger issue. For a home that is off the grid, it might have some use since you always want to be charging your batteries, but I think solar cells are better for this with less maintenance.

Windmills are very good for the companies making and selling them. They are crap for actually generating electricity over the long term and on a daily basis. If the government got out of subsidizing them, they would either disappear, or hopefully improve the technology. As it is, there is no real reason t make them better when they can sell them like they are and make a nice profit.

I also wouldn't rely on anything the government is saying today about future tax credits. They are changing the rules almost daily and just because they say they will do something today, has no bearing on what they say and do tomorrow. Relying on a tax credit next year and the year after seems like wishful thinking when they are working on ways to eliminate tax credits, increase taxes and spend more money. I think you'd have more luck putting your money into the market with a company making a profit off of selling the so called green energy with massive government assistance. As long as tax dollars are propping up those companies, they will turn a profit and their value should hold steady.

Good luck,
Eddie

 

[dmccarty]

... It's a very big wind farm. They went bankrupt because they couldn't afford to keep the windmills working. Rumor has it that newer turbines take less maintenance, and since he no longer has anything to do with those wind farms, I don't know for sure if it's true or not. I was there last year and was shocked to see how many of them had fallen over and had lost their blades. It's a mess....

The WSJ has had a couple articles over the last year or so a about problems in turbine blades. There is a large Indian company that bought out a German company. They have been having problems with the blades failing.

This surprises the heck out of me. We have been making complicated aircraft props for quite a few years, , surely wind turbines are not more complicated?

These were on large turbines. I don't think this problem was on the size of the turbines being discussed in this thread. But I suppose it would be good to ask the turbine company about warranty and known problems.

Later,
Dan

 

[jinman]

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.

 

[BobRip]

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.

Good points. As a start insulate, use efficient appliances, CFL bulbs, etc. Also unplug what is not in use. There is a good payback on this.

 

[mgamber]

Ultimately all the energy we use is Solar (with the exception of geothermal and nuclear), it is just a matter of how effeciently we capture, store and then transmit for use. There has recently been a breakthru in the fields of biology and quantum mechanics that has the potential to make all current energy conversion technology instantly obsolete. It seems that photosynthesis partially works by the strange laws of quantum physics. If this pans out that 50 year return on investment in current technology is gonna be a bitter pill. 10 years from now we will either have super cheap versions of todays tech or something entirely different.

 

[riptides]

I am only 60 miles as the crow flies to Washington DC. What I need is something to harness all the hot air coming out to the farm.

Wind is one thing, hot and cold something else to be thought of.

 

[schmism]

From what I understand, you only generate electricity at certain wind speeds. It's very rare to find a place with consistent wind at the right speed.
Good luck,
Eddie

The large Megawatt generators have variable pitch blades (new versions) or transmissions in them that allow them to work most efficiently at various wind speeds.

True any wind turbine needs a min "break in" speed but the only places they put them are locations with an avg (meaning all the time) min wind speed = to the break in speed.

For small scale turbines they start outputting at ~7 mph and usually output max output at roughtly 30mph after which they will start furling (turning away from the wind) or braking.

As for storing the power its like any other power plant that is "always on" , they dont, its either "use it or loose it" (there is a small test grid in TX that is useing ~4Mw of sodium sulfur batteries to store extra power for peek demand, but thats a rare test case)

 

[WVBill]

A very good friend of mine owns a crane business. Before that, he was in the crane repair business and had the contract for two companies that owned the wind farms on the Altamont Pass in California. It's a very big wind farm. They went bankrupt because they couldn't afford to keep the windmills working.
Eddie

Eddie - That would explain something I've often wondered about. I've been through the Banning Pass on I10 East of LA bunches of times. There's hundreds if not thousands of wind turbines on either side of the freeway all through the pass. The wind is always blowing - - but it always seems like only 20% max of these turbines are actually turning. Now I wonder if it's not because they're down for maintenance.

Zoom in on the Banning Pass in Google Earth and you can see all of the wind turbines!!

 

[dejswa]

Wind turbine longevity is something I am not too familiar with. Being a mechanical device, they certainly would have more problems than solar.I would think that one would not have problems with blades, since the stress on them is far less than aircraft blades, but then again, they are probably made to the minimal specifications by a low bidder (or maybe they are Chinese).

Regarding the prices for solar, etc, it seems that the prices never really change, at least in the last 15 years that I have been looking. It always seems to be $5 per watt for good solar panels. And at current electric prices without rebates or credits, that makes your return on investment equivalent to putting your money in something like 4% savings bond.

I agree, I would not trust getting any additional credits in the future. But if everything else looks good and there is good evidence for an immediate tax credit, then that might help.

And re. the issues of home electric efficiency, yes, that is the key and possibly gives a better ROI than anything else. That is, applying renewable energy to a hopelessly inefficient home doesn't do much. My home unfortunately may be in that category.

 

[debushau]

I've never been able to make sense from wind power on a purely economic analysis. Added to that, there's the headache of the mast, permits, zoning, maintenance. Solar makes so much more sense except for us in the northeast with the worst solar yield in the U.S.!

I figure since 75% of more of my energy bill derives from heating and cooling that it makes more sense to insulate and switch from gas/fuel oil to biomass heating (i.e., wood). Wood is something I have plenty of.

 

[Dunham Farm]

If you want to save money and build your own this is the sight to go to, I'm building a 10' turbine. If you can work on your tractor you can do it.
Welcome to OTHERPOWER.COM
Brian