I've just watched an interesting article on the Norwegian television
news (streamed on the internet) about the largest windfarm in Norway,
somewhere in More og Romsdal. It's recently killed 10 sea eagles. It
makes me wonder what lots of these roof-top generators would do for the
garden birds.

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais/weather/ uk

Adrian D. Shaw wrote:
makes me wonder what lots of these roof-top generators would do for the
garden birds.

Right! That's settled it then - I'm ordering one tomorrow in the hope
that it will rid the area of magpies!!!!



Regards

Neil

I take my hat off to B&Q for leading the way with promoting these Wind
Turbines, and hope that one day every home in the UK at least (where
practical) has one.

So far this year the wind total in mph for Exeter Airport at 18:00 has
totalled 2940 mph, or on average 11 mph per day. I would be interested
to know how much energy this equates to in terms of Kwh as I have used
2300 Kwh of Electricity in the same period.

Jan = 247 mph
Feb = 243 mph
Mar = 402 mph
Apr = 330 mph
May = 369 mph
Jun = 293 mph
Jul = 291 mph
Aug = 385 mph
Sep = 380 mph

Only joking know, what happens if you put a wind turbine on the top of
your car, could you generate energy as you drive along!!!!!

"Tom Bennett" wrote in message
...
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.

Didn't we have these a long time ago? Weren't they called windmills. Okay I
accept that now we turn the energy into electrical energy-AC no doubt, and
this can be fed back into the National grid thus downclocking your meter.
The grid suppliers are just going to love this, all this feeble ac thrown
back in the system. So now now if the winds right, you are now a provider,
do you charge people, send out bills with special offers? I don't know it's
all so topsey. turvey

Bonos Ego wrote:
I take my hat off to B&Q for leading the way with promoting these Wind
Turbines, and hope that one day every home in the UK at least (where
practical) has one.

So far this year the wind total in mph for Exeter Airport at 18:00 has
totalled 2940 mph, or on average 11 mph per day. I would be interested
to know how much energy this equates to in terms of Kwh as I have used
2300 Kwh of Electricity in the same period.

Jan = 247 mph
Feb = 243 mph
Mar = 402 mph
Apr = 330 mph
May = 369 mph
Jun = 293 mph
Jul = 291 mph
Aug = 385 mph
Sep = 380 mph

Only joking know, what happens if you put a wind turbine on the top of
your car, could you generate energy as you drive along!!!!!

The only problem would be the long flex to feed it back into the grid.

Alternatively, electric trains and trams could have wind turbines on
their roofs, and the energy could be fed back via the pantograph/third
rail. In fact if they want fast enough, they could generate enough
energy to power themselves.



Martin

In message , Adrian D. Shaw
writes
Felly sgrifennodd JPG :

Bonos Ego wrote:
Only joking know, what happens if you put a wind turbine on the top of
your car, could you generate energy as you drive along!!!!!

Using your (petrol) engine as power for it? That sounds like expensive
electricity to me!

The only problem would be the long flex to feed it back into the grid.

Alternatively, electric trains and trams could have wind turbines on
their roofs, and the energy could be fed back via the pantograph/third
rail. In fact if they want fast enough, they could generate enough
energy to power themselves.

This is a serious consideration for braking (not using wind turbines,
but by using the electric motors in reverse as generators) - could this
not be done? My guess why it is not done is that it is far too difficult
to get the phase right to feed it back. The Swiss mountain railways use
engine braking, but feed nothing back. The energy is dissipated in heat.
This seems such a waste.

Doesn't the London Underground use this method?

Norman.
(delete "thisbit" twice to e-mail)
--
Norman Lynagh Weather Consultancy
Chalfont St Giles 85m a.s.l.
England

Felly sgrifennodd JPG :

Bonos Ego wrote:
Only joking know, what happens if you put a wind turbine on the top of
your car, could you generate energy as you drive along!!!!!

Using your (petrol) engine as power for it? That sounds like expensive
electricity to me!

The only problem would be the long flex to feed it back into the grid.

Alternatively, electric trains and trams could have wind turbines on
their roofs, and the energy could be fed back via the pantograph/third
rail. In fact if they want fast enough, they could generate enough
energy to power themselves.

This is a serious consideration for braking (not using wind turbines,
but by using the electric motors in reverse as generators) - could this
not be done? My guess why it is not done is that it is far too difficult
to get the phase right to feed it back. The Swiss mountain railways use
engine braking, but feed nothing back. The energy is dissipated in heat.
This seems such a waste.



Noted - it's OK! But there is a serious side too.

Adrian

--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais/weather/ uk

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:34:16 GMT, Norman Lynagh
wrote:

In message , Adrian D. Shaw
writes
Felly sgrifennodd JPG :

Bonos Ego wrote:
Only joking know, what happens if you put a wind turbine on the top of
your car, could you generate energy as you drive along!!!!!

Using your (petrol) engine as power for it? That sounds like expensive
electricity to me!

The only problem would be the long flex to feed it back into the grid.

Alternatively, electric trains and trams could have wind turbines on
their roofs, and the energy could be fed back via the pantograph/third
rail. In fact if they want fast enough, they could generate enough
energy to power themselves.

This is a serious consideration for braking (not using wind turbines,
but by using the electric motors in reverse as generators) - could this
not be done? My guess why it is not done is that it is far too difficult
to get the phase right to feed it back. The Swiss mountain railways use
engine braking, but feed nothing back. The energy is dissipated in heat.
This seems such a waste.

Doesn't the London Underground use this method?

630VDC - far, far easier.


--
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd. http://www.pherber.com/
Electronics for Visio http://www.electronics.sandrila.co.uk/

Paul Herber wrote:
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:34:16 GMT, Norman Lynagh
wrote:

Doesn't the London Underground use this method?

630VDC - far, far easier.

That's free faze I take it?

The point to all this is covered, I know; the tech is still in the dark
ages. Modern mills should be cutting in not out with the increase in
available energy. Perhaps instead of banks of batteries there should be
banks of generators.

The unfortunate imporunity with huge masts and huge blades, is that the
wind speeds at near ground levels change so drastically in the height
of the blade. Is this the cause of the noise they make?

I should imagine the most efficient design for a rooftop mounted set up
would be a spiral running the length of the roof at the point where
there is the most wear and tear on the tiles. At least the long term
effect would be a nett gain.

Didn't we have these a long time ago? Weren't they called windmills. Okay I
accept that now we turn the energy into electrical energy-AC no doubt, and
this can be fed back into the National grid thus downclocking your meter.
The grid suppliers are just going to love this, all this feeble ac thrown
back in the system. So now now if the winds right, you are now a provider,
do you charge people, send out bills with special offers? I don't know it's
all so topsey. turvey


It is well worth reading the current issue of New Scientist in which the
rooftop windmill generator is effectively demolished. I wouldn't waste
money on one.
But I have solar water heating, which on the east coast of England has
allowed me to reduce my immersion heater usage by half this summer.