Slashdot Mirror


Vertical Axis Wind Turbine With Push and Pull

Sterling D. Allan writes "After 10 years of prototyping, wind tunnel testing, patenting, and tweaking, Ron Taylor of Cheyenne (windy) Wyoming is ready to take his vertical axis wind turbine into commercial production. Design creates pull on the back side contributing to 40%+ wind conversion efficiencies. Because it spins at wind speed, it doesn't kill birds, and it runs more quietly. It also doesn't need to be installed as high, and it can withstand significantly higher winds (can generate in winds up to 70 mph, compared to ~54 mph tops for propeller designs). Generating costs estimated at 2.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, putting it in the lead pocket-book-wise not just of wind and solar, but of conventional power as well. Production prototype completion expected in 5-7 months."

6 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Sorry... by utexaspunk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but I don't take anything "Open Source Energy News" posts seriously anymore. It seems like every post that comes from them is a crackpot.

    1. Re:Sorry... by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How is this open source? Pictures are not shown because it is patent pending and every other paragraph mentions something about the patents, at one point proudly mentioning that they are sufficiently broad to make an attorney happy (because they'll mean lots of work for the attorney?).

      But my question is, if it has a patent pending, why don't they publish? I thought that the whole reason for patents was to encourage people to publish their inventions. If the patent is pending, what's the risk?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  2. For some values of "ready" by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ron Taylor of Cheyenne (windy) Wyoming is ready to take his vertical axis wind turbine into commercial production......Production prototype completion expected in 5-7 months.

    Now being the old fuddy duddy I am (at the tender age of 21) I'm obviously using an old and outdated definition for "ready for commercial production." See, the definition I'm using is one where the prototyping stage is over, and these things are being made in some factory and are about to be sold to companies/people. Now obviously not being up-to-date with the latest definitions, I was quite excited when I read it was ready, only to have my hopes dashed by the end of the summary.

    Why don't you call us old-timers when you actually have a commercial product?

  3. Worse than that by ishmaelflood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if the downwind blade is travelling at windspeed, it is generating no force (and admittedly killing no birds who are flying with the wind, ie balloons). But, that implies that the upwind blade is travelling at twice the windspeed, relative to the wind.

    So that little argument is rubbish.

    Actually, the whole article is not too bad overall, we certainly see worse in real papers (eg the Guardian's coverage of that hydrogen atom fraud).

  4. Re:Could be useful for microgrids by BlowChunx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just looking at the prototype from the article, it looks to me like they have "inlet guid vanes" which would direct the incoming air so that it hits the rotor blades at the correct angle, so there would be no need for variable angle of attack (as there is with propellers...).

  5. Re:Picked up by mainstream press by nmos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I guess you didn't notice that the story was also run by CBS News and Yahoo News, among other mainstream organs.

    They're all just regurgitating the same story/press release that originated at the Jackson Hole Star Tribune and was passed along to the AP. All this is is an advertisement for venture capital, the same as the last couple you submitted. Both you and Slashdot should be ashamed at running these adds. as if they were news.