Posts Tagged ‘windturbine’

Adding Turbines to Existing Structures

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

The photo below is a mock-up of the winning idea for Metropolis Magazine’s 2009 Next Generation Competition: Wind turbines attached to electrical towers.

Wind It

While the article acknowledges some shortfalls in the idea (“The general consensus was that the adaptive-reuse model would be tricky to justify financially.”) it brings up an interesting question around how you can begin to integrate the technology into the landscape even more whether it’s possible to effectively (and efficiently) use existing construction (it sounds tough, but not impossible). I also really like the look of their designs, as we mentioned in our Turbine Aesthetics post last month, we think there are big opportunities to bring a little more flair to the design and layout.

Making a Case for Wind

Thursday, April 30th, 2009

Ran across an interesting article over at The Oil Drum: Europe that defends wind energy as a viable option for our energy needs. (As a side note I’ve been working on a longer entry about some of the stuff we learned about the economics of wind power that hopefully I can get finished this week.) Anyway, I found this chart comparing the growth of nuclear energy in the 60s and 70s to the growth of wind over the last 15 years particularly interesting:

wind vs nuclear

Interesting.

Getting a Wind Turbine Up a Mountain

Friday, April 17th, 2009

So we’ve posted a bunch of stuff about the Jiminy Peak wind turbine, from how it works to all the surveys and work they had to do before it went up. What none of these speak to, however, is what an ordeal it was to get the turbine to the top of Jiminy Peak (a ski mountain). Luckily the folks at Jiminy had lots of video, which they sent us and let us post. So …. here’s the turbine going up the hill. (Music is by Sarah Schachner who owns the full rights to it and all that jazz but was kind enough to let us use it for this video. Thanks Sarah.)

3Tier

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

Hrm, this is super interesting. Apparently there is a company called 3TIER that has a bunch of products to help people who are considering renewable energy products figure out the feasability. (The feasability studies at the beginning of any renewable project is apparently one of the more time and money consuming parts of the project. Part of the reason why EOS exists.)

Firstlook

Here’s how they describe one of their products, Firstlook (pictured above), on their site: “FirstLook Prospecting for wind is the first and only online tool that allows you to evaluate a potential site quickly and for a fraction of the cost of traditional methods.” You can even play around with it a bit here.

No idea if it actually works, but clearly there will be lots more entrepreneurs playing in this space in the future. I wonder whether we can’t find some good way for GE to support/promote folks like this. Seems to me like the more smooth and easy it is for people to get their renewable projects off the ground, the better it is for all of us (even if GE doesn’t normally sell single turbines).

Oh, and here’s the Forbes video interview with the CEO of 3TIER:

Spin

Tuesday, April 14th, 2009

EOS Ventures

Tuesday, April 14th, 2009

EOS VenturesThis was going to be a post about the economics of wind (which I will get to and add a link once I post), but I decided to first tell the story of how Jiminy Peak got their wind turbine. First, it’s important to understand that there aren’t a lot of other single wind turbines around, most of them are part of large wind farms. Jiminy Peak actually has “the only privately owned megawatt class turbine in the nation for on-site energy usage,” according to the EOS Ventures website. Basically, after going through the process of surveying and procuring the turbine the team at Jiminy learned a ton and decided to start a company to help others get their renewable energy projects off the ground.

Here are the steps they went through (which come from full case study outlining the process at the EOS site).

  1. Wetlands study for the access road and site.
  2. Wetlands assessment for surrounding area.
  3. Avian Assessment, (bird study).
  4. A determination by Massachusetts Environmental Protection Agency (MEPA) for an Environmental Notification Form (ENF).
  5. Study of rare and endangered species was completed.
  6. A letter of opinion was obtained from the National Heritage Society.
  7. Civil engineering analysis of site and access roads.
  8. Visual Impact Assessment of the project (photo simulations).

Then, once they finished all that and realized it was a viable option they went to talk to GE. Because GE doesn’t sell a 1 megawatt turbine (the smallest is a 1.5 mw) Jiminy had to go back to the drawing board and do a few more studies to make sure the larger turbine wouldn’t be an issue. This second round looked like this:

  1. A re-evaluation of the wind study and determination of how many kilowatt hours could be generated by a GE turbine indicated it will produce 4.6 MILLION KILOWATT HOURS of electricity. (Jiminy uses 7 million kilowatt hours).
  2. Turbulence data was necessary in order to assure there would be no excessive vibrations to the turbine over the useful life of the next 50 years. Historical weather information proved there are no turbulence concerns.
  3. The ability for the turbines connection into Jiminy’s electrical distribution and National Grid’s distribution system was satisfactory answered.
  4. Civil Engineering and contractor capabilities for hauling this heavier piece of equipment up the mountain and installing it was resolved.

Finally after everything was cleared they installed it (a whole other ordeal, since it’s not every day you need to get a structure of that size to the top of a ski mountain). The total cost $3.9 million and it’s predicted to take 8 years to pay back (all according to EOS of course).

Clearly not a very easy process, which is exactly why the team at Jiminy started EOS. Very interesting.

How Wind Tubines Work

Monday, April 13th, 2009

Our guide Ryan up at Jiminy Peak was kind enough to explain to us how turbines work. I’ll let you watch the video and learn for yourself, but here are a few highlights:

  • They run at a constant 22rpm (or as close it as possible), which they maintain by pitching the blades and turning the Nacelle.
  • All of this is handled automatically by a weather station on top.

Okay, I’ll let Ryan explain …

The Turbine at Jiminy Peak

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

We’ve posted a few videos and things from our trip to the wind turbine at Jiminy Peak, but we haven’t talked about it much yet. So … that’s exactly what I’m going to do.

First off, here are the basics: It went up in August of 2007, it’s 80 meters high (that’s 262.467192 feet according to Google), each blade is 37 meters long (~121 feet … which is about 10 feet bigger than the largest blue whale ever recorded) and it’s roughly a 7-to-7.5 year return on investment for the folks at Jiminy Peak. (I will go deeper into how they made this whole thing happen in another post. Turns out it’s not super easy for an individual/organization to procure a single turbine.)

Anyhow, here’s Betsy from Jiminy talking about how it happened and why they made the decision to go with a turbine:


As a side note, she mentions the trouble with getting it up there. We’re trying to find the video of them doing that to throw up on the site. Hopefully will be up in the next few days.

Turbining

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

We’re slowly getting through all the video from our trips so far (probably about 12-15 hours total). We’ll be posting the good stuff as we go. Here’s our day at the turbine in 3:42.

Nacelle

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

A wind turbine is basically made up of three parts: A giant tube, 3 big blades and a nacelle (which is the name for the thing that sits at the top of the giant tube and holds the blades in place).

I had never heard the word “nacelle” before we visited Jiminy Peak, so I decided to figure out what it’s all about. So … It’s, “A streamlined enclosure (as for an engine) on an aircraft.” Here’s how Miriam Webster breaks down the etymology: “French, literally, small boat, from Late Latin nacicella, diminutive of Latin navis ship” (apologies if this is only interesting to me).

The thing is about the size of a school bus and holds all those parts you can see above. It’s pretty much the guts of the turbine.