A Spanish startup's wind turbine sways instead of spinning, but its 100-watt output is far from replacing regular turbines.
  • lime!@feddit.nuEnglish
    211·
    4 days ago

    “this one-off half scale prototype is worse than a technology we’ve been deploying for 30 years”

    …yes? so?

  • pixxelkick@lemmy.worldEnglish
    172·
    5 days ago

    1. But, how much cheaper is it to build, and how more or less impactful is it on the environment

    2. Can it be installed places normal turbines physically cant? If so the comparison becomes pointless.

    If its cheaper and easier to maintain and/or it can go places pther options can’t, then it becomes a valid solution.

    The problem with power is also distribution. Sure, you can put big turbines in a spot but you also have to deliver that power out to a grid.

    Many small turbines help solve distribution problems, the closer you can get the source to the target, the less expensive it is.

    100W might be more than enough power for remote use cases, stations or small monitoring setups where they dont need a whole ass 3.4mw.

    Think stuff like nature parks, powering an outhouse, or other basic amenities like just a couple lights at night.

    Campsites, ranger fire monitoring stations, etc etc.

    Spots where you could easily place 2-3 of these, and the area has poor sunlight due to location. Some regions get pretty poor solar power due to weather but really good wind.

    • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      8·
      4 days ago
      1. But, how much cheaper is it to build, and how more or less impactful is it on the environment

      Not 34k times cheaper or less impactful.

      I won’t say there is absolutely no case where these things could be sufficient, but I really doubt you couldn’t just build a modern turbine in smaller scale that might be somewhat overpowered but still cheaper.

      • madnificent@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        4 days ago

        Quick back of the napkin calculation assuming evolving tech.

        9ft is about 3m.

        A 100kW wind turbine needed a tower height of 30m.

        That’s a factor 10 difference.

        If we could assume the tower needs to scale linearly in width, depth, and height, that would make a pole cost difference of 10x10x10 = 1000.

        I did not make this up but 100kW/1000 is 100W so it would be on par with a 30m high pole.

        The wind blows substantially stronger higher up so I’m not comparing to those on purpose, and this was easy to calculate. I also don’t know the cost or real size of this 9ft pole. If it doesn’t need blades it’ll be even lower and it might be cheaper. Perhaps it can be scaled up too.