Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines available at
B&Q etc., exempting them from Planning restraints and making Govt. grants
available, made me wonder if they were really suitable for all parts of the
UK and if people were going to be properly advised before they rush headlong
into buying them. (In case anyone gets the wrong impression, I should add
that I'm an advocate of any effective measure that can reduce out dependence
on fossil fuels)

We've had some indications that the payback period may be 10 years or so
(with a projected life of the unit of around the same!), although the
capital cost is bound to fall as demand increases and the Govt. grants make
a difference, but I'm more interested to find out if anyone has looked at
the windspeeds over the UK to work out where the thresholds are for domestic
units to become viable.

Where I am now (SW Essex) is markedly less breezy, throughout the whole
year, than lowland Co. Durham where I lived previously, with far more calm
days here than I ever experienced before, so I'm surmising that any turbine
I bought would lie idle for much more time here than it would there.
Conversely, I'd assume that, with the stronger sunshine throughout the year,
I would get more benefit here from solar panels and photovoltaic cells, and
the strength of the sunlight and reduced cloudiness would outweigh the
shorter day lengths in the south in summer.

As things stand, I can see the more affluent south rushing out to buy far
more turbines than elsewhere, thinking they were doing right by the planet,
when in fact the overall benefit was nowhere near as marked as they thought
it would be. Wouldn't the Govt. be better off focussing any grants to the
areas better suited to the various technologies that are available and
provide the public with some guidance *before* B&Q et al start cashing-in?

Just a thought.

- Tom
Blackmore, SW Essex.

Tom Bennett wrote:
Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines
available at B&Q etc., exempting them from Planning restraints and
making Govt. grants available, made me wonder if they were really
suitable for all parts of the UK and if people were going to be
properly advised before they rush headlong into buying them. (In
case anyone gets the wrong impression, I should add that I'm an
advocate of any effective measure that can reduce out dependence on
fossil fuels)
We've had some indications that the payback period may be 10 years or
so (with a projected life of the unit of around the same!), although
the capital cost is bound to fall as demand increases and the Govt.
grants make a difference, but I'm more interested to find out if
anyone has looked at the windspeeds over the UK to work out where the
thresholds are for domestic units to become viable.

Where I am now (SW Essex) is markedly less breezy, throughout the
whole year, than lowland Co. Durham where I lived previously, with
far more calm days here than I ever experienced before, so I'm
surmising that any turbine I bought would lie idle for much more time
here than it would there. Conversely, I'd assume that, with the
stronger sunshine throughout the year, I would get more benefit here
from solar panels and photovoltaic cells, and the strength of the
sunlight and reduced cloudiness would outweigh the shorter day
lengths in the south in summer.
As things stand, I can see the more affluent south rushing out to buy
far more turbines than elsewhere, thinking they were doing right by
the planet, when in fact the overall benefit was nowhere near as
marked as they thought it would be. Wouldn't the Govt. be better off
focussing any grants to the areas better suited to the various
technologies that are available and provide the public with some
guidance *before* B&Q et al start cashing-in?
Just a thought.

- Tom
Blackmore, SW Essex.

Funnily enough, I've been into B&Q a lot lately and saw the appearance of
the turbine:

http://tinyurl.com/eqzf6

(takes you to)

http://www.diy.com/diy/jsp/bq/nav/na...1598796 93901

It's quoted at 1kW for wind speeds of 12.5m/s so I'll look at my data logs
(W.Somerset) with interest this winter to see what any payback would really
be....

Looking at the mechanics, it appears to be a fairly standard 6 pole motor
directly coupled to the turbine itself - let's hope they've got the axial
and radial load calculations correct.....

"Tom Bennett" wrote in message
...
Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines available at
B&Q etc.,

snip

- Tom
Blackmore, SW Essex.

Hi Tom,

I personally can't see the benefit of these home turbines. Even if high
demand and the resulting mass production brings the price down there are too
many negatives for my liking. Most of my
concerns are way off topic. But maintenance and upkeep are my first
considerations. When the
bearings start drying up and ceasing there will surely be an awful lot of
disturbed nights.
How do they tie up with the domestic electricity supply? Once there is
legislation in favour of
domestic turbines it will only be a matter of time before they are
compulsory. Who will be the first to be incarcerated for refusing to have a
clattering rusting machine on their roof? Then the
insurers will have field day. What if one of these rusting clattering
machines falls on your neighbour?

I have nothing against wind turbines. Indeed a large wind farm has just been
built off-shore
from the Fylde Coast where I live. There was some opposition from
conservation groups
and fishermen. Luckily the scheme went ahead. Wind power, generated on an
industrial scale with well maintained turbines supplying the national grid,
should be promoted and encouraged. We should avoid a costly eco-fad.

Paulus

cupra wrote:
Tom Bennett wrote:
Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines
available at B&Q etc., exempting them from Planning restraints and
making Govt. grants available, made me wonder if they were really
suitable for all parts of the UK and if people were going to be
properly advised before they rush headlong into buying them. (In
case anyone gets the wrong impression, I should add that I'm an
advocate of any effective measure that can reduce out dependence on
fossil fuels)
We've had some indications that the payback period may be 10 years or
so (with a projected life of the unit of around the same!), although
the capital cost is bound to fall as demand increases and the Govt.
grants make a difference, but I'm more interested to find out if
anyone has looked at the windspeeds over the UK to work out where the
thresholds are for domestic units to become viable.

Where I am now (SW Essex) is markedly less breezy, throughout the
whole year, than lowland Co. Durham where I lived previously, with
far more calm days here than I ever experienced before, so I'm
surmising that any turbine I bought would lie idle for much more time
here than it would there. Conversely, I'd assume that, with the
stronger sunshine throughout the year, I would get more benefit here
from solar panels and photovoltaic cells, and the strength of the
sunlight and reduced cloudiness would outweigh the shorter day
lengths in the south in summer.
As things stand, I can see the more affluent south rushing out to buy
far more turbines than elsewhere, thinking they were doing right by
the planet, when in fact the overall benefit was nowhere near as
marked as they thought it would be. Wouldn't the Govt. be better off
focussing any grants to the areas better suited to the various
technologies that are available and provide the public with some
guidance *before* B&Q et al start cashing-in?
Just a thought.

- Tom
Blackmore, SW Essex.

Funnily enough, I've been into B&Q a lot lately and saw the appearance of
the turbine:

http://tinyurl.com/eqzf6

(takes you to)

http://www.diy.com/diy/jsp/bq/nav/na...1598796 93901

It's quoted at 1kW for wind speeds of 12.5m/s so I'll look at my data logs
(W.Somerset) with interest this winter to see what any payback would really
be....

Looking at the mechanics, it appears to be a fairly standard 6 pole motor
directly coupled to the turbine itself - let's hope they've got the axial
and radial load calculations correct.....


The B&Q units will be on-line between approx 4.5 to 14 M/S (9 to 31 mph)
so they seem to have a reasonable operating range.

I wonder what the output is at lower wind speeds?

I feel a bit of number crunching with excel coming on!

Tom Bennett wrote:
Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines available at
B&Q etc.,

Assuming the stated savings are made (30%) then at the stated price, the payback
period for myself would be 15 years. The safe life of the unit is 10 years in a
suitable location so I might expect less in my saline situation. Not viable
even here in the windy north.

I would really like to have a wind turbine, but it would need to be a little
more cost effective (at least cost neutral) and would need to generate more than
1kW, feeding any surplus into the grid.

B&Q also offer a range of solar panels, for heating a stored water cylinder, or
for combination boiler systems. These range from about 1500 to 2500 GBP but
give no indication of likely savings - if they only provide hot water then they
would probably never cost in for me.

Hopefully, things will improve in the near future, enabling all homes to be more
or less independent of the national grid.



--
Gianna

Neil wrote:
cupra wrote:
snip

http://tinyurl.com/eqzf6

(takes you to)

http://www.diy.com/diy/jsp/bq/nav/na...1598796 93901

It's quoted at 1kW for wind speeds of 12.5m/s so I'll look at my
data logs (W.Somerset) with interest this winter to see what any
payback would really be....

Looking at the mechanics, it appears to be a fairly standard 6 pole
motor directly coupled to the turbine itself - let's hope they've
got the axial and radial load calculations correct.....


The B&Q units will be on-line between approx 4.5 to 14 M/S (9 to 31
mph) so they seem to have a reasonable operating range.

I wonder what the output is at lower wind speeds?

I feel a bit of number crunching with excel coming on!

If you're bored,

Power = (torque * speed) / /9550)

where speed = motor (generator) shaft speed in rpm, power in Watts and
torque in Nm....

Don't forget to factor the losses in the motor (iron loss, copper loss,
windage loss and frictional loss) plus the control gear power losses as well

Tom Bennett wrote:
Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines available at
B&Q etc., exempting them from Planning restraints and making Govt. grants
available, made me wonder if they were really suitable for all parts of the
UK and if people were going to be properly advised before they rush headlong
into buying them.

You only have to look at the number of slimy high pressure salesmen out
fleecing people for unusable solar power installations to see what the
future holds. At least with wind power there is some chance of getting
useful energy out of the thing in midwinter when you need it.

Although the self immolation of one of the big windpower units on the
Nissan site in Durham last Xmas closing the A19 somewhat damped my
enthusiasm for owing one.

We've had some indications that the payback period may be 10 years or so
(with a projected life of the unit of around the same!), although the
capital cost is bound to fall as demand increases and the Govt. grants make
a difference, but I'm more interested to find out if anyone has looked at
the windspeeds over the UK to work out where the thresholds are for domestic
units to become viable.

The Department of Timidity and Inactivity has a surprisingly useful
website database which gives annual mean windspeed for a given 6 figure
grid reference square at:

http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sources...page27326.html

BWEA are among the biggest fans of wind power (sorry about the pun)

http://www.bwea.com/

There are some pretty windy places in the south of England too...

Where I am now (SW Essex) is markedly less breezy, throughout the whole
year, than lowland Co. Durham where I lived previously, with far more calm
days here than I ever experienced before, so I'm surmising that any turbine
I bought would lie idle for much more time here than it would there.

Very likely. The small domestic ones will not make you popular. The
noise levels from them can be pretty annoying at close quarters in a
stiff breeze.

Conversely, I'd assume that, with the stronger sunshine throughout the year,
I would get more benefit here from solar panels and photovoltaic cells, and
the strength of the sunlight and reduced cloudiness would outweigh the
shorter day lengths in the south in summer.

We are too far north in latitude for solar power photovoltaic cells to
be cost effective. The best you can hope for with solar is lashings of
hot water in mid-summer.

As things stand, I can see the more affluent south rushing out to buy far
more turbines than elsewhere, thinking they were doing right by the planet,
when in fact the overall benefit was nowhere near as marked as they thought
it would be. Wouldn't the Govt. be better off focussing any grants to the
areas better suited to the various technologies that are available and
provide the public with some guidance *before* B&Q et al start cashing-in?

Of course, but when did a UK government ever do "Joined up thinking"...

Regards,
Martin Brown

Tom Bennett wrote:
Looking with interest at recent talk of making wind turbines available at
B&Q etc., exempting them from Planning restraints and making Govt. grants
available, made me wonder if they were really suitable for all parts of the
UK and if people were going to be properly advised before they rush headlong
into buying them. (In case anyone gets the wrong impression, I should add
that I'm an advocate of any effective measure that can reduce out dependence
on fossil fuels)

We've had some indications that the payback period may be 10 years or so
(with a projected life of the unit of around the same!), although the
capital cost is bound to fall as demand increases and the Govt. grants make
a difference, but I'm more interested to find out if anyone has looked at
the windspeeds over the UK to work out where the thresholds are for domestic
units to become viable.

Where I am now (SW Essex) is markedly less breezy, throughout the whole
year, than lowland Co. Durham where I lived previously, with far more calm
days here than I ever experienced before, so I'm surmising that any turbine
I bought would lie idle for much more time here than it would there.
Conversely, I'd assume that, with the stronger sunshine throughout the year,
I would get more benefit here from solar panels and photovoltaic cells, and
the strength of the sunlight and reduced cloudiness would outweigh the
shorter day lengths in the south in summer.

As things stand, I can see the more affluent south rushing out to buy far
more turbines than elsewhere, thinking they were doing right by the planet,
when in fact the overall benefit was nowhere near as marked as they thought
it would be. Wouldn't the Govt. be better off focussing any grants to the
areas better suited to the various technologies that are available and
provide the public with some guidance *before* B&Q et al start cashing-in?

Just a thought.


The UK is quite well-blessed with wind, even in the south, as evidenced
by the large turbines in Kent and Northamptonshire, and these are only
the ones I have seen in my travels, I've no doubt there are others.
The strong winds of the north may even be counter-productive, as
turbines will need to be stronger and I would guess these devices might
need to be speed-governed, so the extra wind may be no advantage.

I don't know how B&Q et al are going to deal with energy storage -
essential with our variable winds - will it be as heat or battery or
other means. What about rectifiers and inverters and synchronising
with the grid etc. It will be interesting to see what they come out
with.

Martin


- Tom
Blackmore, SW Essex.

You could always change your Electricity supplier instead there's a good
offer here
http://www.theecologist.co.uk/banner.asp?banner_id=22

I think you get a free sub to the Ecologist.

Neil wrote:

The B&Q units will be on-line between approx 4.5 to 14 M/S (9 to 31 mph)
so they seem to have a reasonable operating range.

I feel a bit of number crunching with excel coming on!

Looking at my logged wind speed observations over the last 10 years or
so, only just over 5% of my hourly mean wind speeds have reached force
4 (5 m/s +), ranging from 12% in February to 0.5% in August. The
windiest hour since my anemometer records commenced in 1993 had a mean
speed of 25.4 kn (13.1 m/s) - 1 Feb 2002.

My site is a fairly exposed one in a rural location with a pretty good
anemometer exposure (11 m above ground); my mean annual wind speed (12
years data) is 4.3 kn (2.2 m/s). In suburban/urban situations mean wind
speeds at rooftop heights will be lower still, and gustier too.

Unless turbines can be developed that generate useful power at closer
to the mean annual wind speeds prevalent in SE England, I can't see
that a device that is only just generating power at best 10% of the
time is ever likely to be economic - much as I might wish otherwise!

A large wind turbine was erected a few kilometres north of me (on the
southern outskirts of Reading, on the Green Park business park next to
M4 junction 11) just under a year ago. It apparently generates up to 3
MW; but its blades are 35 m long and the turbine is 85 m tall - not
exactly a domestic unit. I drive almost past it on my way to work every
morning, and it's interesting to see how often the wind at that height
differs considerably from the surface winds.


Stephen Burt
Stratfield Mortimer, Berkshire