Home Wind-Power Turbines Make Headway

Pickens writes "Wind turbines, once used primarily for farms and rural houses far from electrical service, are becoming more common in heavily populated residential areas as homeowners are attracted to ease of use, financial incentives and low environmental effects. Experts on renewable energy say a convergence of factors, political, technical and ecological, is causing a surge in the use of residential wind turbines, especially in the Northeast and California. "Back in the early days, off-grid electrical generation was pursued mostly by hippies and rednecks, usually in isolated, rural areas," said Joe Schwartz, editor of Home Power magazine. "Now, it's a lot more mainstream." Some of the new "plug and play" systems can be plugged directly into a circuit in the home electrical panel and homeowners can use energy from the wind turbine or the power company without taking action. Schwartz says that even with the economic benefits, it can take 20 years to pay back the installation cost. "This isn't about people putting turbines in to lower their electric bills as much as it is about people voting with their dollars to help the environment in some small way," he said."

Comments

How green is it?

[Overzeetop]

This isn't about people putting turbines in to lower their electric bills as much as it is about people voting with their dollars to help the environment in some small way Because the energy embodied in all those manufactured items is less than the equivalent high-efficiency central generation plant, or because you get the one-up the Joneses in their Prius? Never trust the words of someone who is looking to sell you something.

Re:How green is it?

[CastrTroy]

There's probably a lot of other things you could do with the same money, like put in a ground-loop heating/cooling system. Of course, it wouldn't be as showy, and none of the neighbors would know you had it, so it's not the best way to show off how eco friendly you are, but would probably benefit you quite a bit more.

Re:How green is it?

[eric76]

Another way to be more environmentally friendly would be to use adobe or compressed earth building techniques.

In this area, we get about the same amount of yearly rainfall as in places like Santa Fe, New Mexico where the use of adobe is very common. I think it would do quite well.

For cooling, swamp coolers work quite well for us.

Re:How green is it?

[Skynyrd]

I am involved with a group of people building windmills. It has nothing to do with buying things. It has nothing to do with keeping up with the neighbors. None of us drive Priuses (most of think they are a scam unless you live in a super-densely populated place).

We're buying used motors on eBay. Some of us are making our own blades from fiberglass (and some are buying them).

We have created an open source hardware project that makes power. It'll cost me $300 - $400 to make something I think is cool, will pay for itself over time, help reduce my footprint on the planet in an almost measurable way and let me do something creative.

You got a problem with that?

Re:How green is it?

[Overzeetop]

That's the great thing about the cost - it's already rolled into the price (the energy costs). Power from a major generation facility also factors in the capital costs of the plant (embodied energy) and the cost of fuel, plus the cost of maintenance and upgrades. The summary indicates a 20 year payback. That's usually done without the time value of money factored in, and without maintenance costs. Once you get beyond 7-10 years, it's generally not economical from a business point of view. Also, with a 20 year payback, it means that the energy embodied in the unit is nearly as high as the total lifetime output of the unit. Solar cells (photovoltaics) are the same way, though there's always a new technology right around the corner that plans to change that, but it never seems to be commercially viable.

Personally, I'm a practical green. I'm even willing to pay a small premium for green, provided it's equivalent to the non-green alternative. Being in the building industry, where we get greenwashing all over the place, so I tend to be skeptical. The old marketing slogan, "reduce, reuse, recycle" should have has a tag line, "in that order." I can't say I'm living it completely, but where it's practical I'm in. Wind turbines can be a positive source of energy, but they can also be an eyesore. They are also one step removed from the primary source of power - solar. Once we figure out how to efficiently capture and store even a small fraction of the 1200W/m^2 that hits the earth, we'll go a long way to solving our energy problems. It's as close to an ideal solution as can be had, though it's not without pitfalls. Still, I look forward to 40% efficient solar panels with lifetimes measured in at least years, if not decades, which can be bought for less than a penny per kilowatt hour. I'll use them to power my flying car ;-)

Re:How green is it?

[flaming error]

It sounds like you are saying that:

  1) A wind turbine won't generate enough electricity over its lifetime
        to offset grid usage and the manufacture of itself

That could be true in some situations. Depends on the turbine and the location. When pursuing sustainable energy, it's vital to pick the sort of generator that best fits the local environment. Sometimes that's not wind. Sometimes it is.

  2) Wind turbine purchases are just conspicuous consumption of a green flavor

Showing off may be the motive for some people, but all the turbine owners I know sincerely are trying to live sustainably (and are often entertained by the logical contortions HEMI fanboys utilize to claim green equality/superiority).

  3) Wind turbine owners are suckered by slick salesmen

The owners I know did extensive research, and almost all of them built their own from kits or scratch.

So you can definitely do wind wrong and lose on carbon. You can also do it right. And there are many benefits to wind power. Even if your electricity is more expensive than the grid's, some people are willing to pay more for what they consider a higher quality product. Fossil-fuel electricity can't stay artificially cheap forever. Distributed generation can be more robust than centralized plants (like TCP/IP).

Plus you get free poultry delivered to your backyard.

Re:How green is it?

[Overzeetop]

Not at all, as long as I don't have to look at it. These systems, imho, are trying to capitalize on the "green" craze and with a 20 year payback (probably without TVM or maintenance figured in) just don't pass muster. I'm with you on the the fun, cheap stuff. Reusing old parts is excellent (remember - reduce, reuse, recycle...in that order), and likely far greener than new turbines even if less efficient.

Then again, maybe I'm just jealous because my house sits on the leeward side of a ridge, so I get very little wind. Of course, in a 40 year old house, being out of the wind in the winter is definitely a _good_ thing for reducing my overall energy consumption!

Re:How green is it?

[wvmarle]

Plus you get free poultry delivered to your backyard. And that is not true. I recall a research being done by green groups in The Netherlands, where we have large wind parks in the northern part, mostly on the seashore of course. The idea was that those huge fast moving blades must be killing scores of birds.

They found that is not the case. Birds hardly get killed by turbines - accidents happen of course, but are rare.

The researchers thought that this is because of the noise those turbines make, even upwind this is audible to the birds at sufficient distance. So they just fly around them. The mortality was as low or lower than around power lines: those also kill birds that happen to fly into them.

This result actually surprised the researchers, in a happy way of course. And the research being done by a.o. animal protection groups gives it quite some credit to me.

Re:How green is it?

[flyingfsck]

If you want to get started simply, buy a 24 inch, 24 Volt cooling fan for a stationery motor (something like a caterpillar diesel). Add a large diode, mount it on a tall wooden pole with a wire coming down loosely with an in-line plug (so you can unwrap the cable every few weeks), run it to a 12V battery and you have yourself a simple 12 DC system for a cost of $150 (new) or so.

This type of simple systems are common for powering seaside holiday bungalows.

Re:How green is it?

[fredklein]

It's not "300-400", but...

"The BWC EXCEL (http://www.bergey.com/) is a modern 6.7 meter (22 ft) diameter, 10,000W wind turbine designed for high reliability, low maintenance, and automatic operation in adverse weather conditions"
"Prices, which include a voltage regulator, pump controller, or a line-commutated inverter, range from $21,900 to $27,900."
"The BWC EXCEL is most often installed on a guyed lattice tower, which is available in heights of 18 m (60 ft.) to 43 m (140 ft.). Prices range from $7,400 to $12,680. "

SO, *worst case scenario* is 27,900 + 12,680 = $40,580.

Now, Electricity is what, about 10 cents per kilowatt hour? So $40,580 will buy 405,800 kwh of electricity.

In the last 2 months, I used a total of 946 kwhs for my small 2br apartment. Let's say a house'll use twice that, or about 1000kwh per month.

It'll take 405 months (33 years) for the system to pay for itself.

Of course, Your electric bill is more than just 'kwh x price per kwh'. Heck, I pay more in "Power Supply Charges" than I do in "delivery and System charges". All in all, I pay 19.39 cents per kwh. That means $40,580 will buy 209,499 kwh of electricity, and the system pays for itself in 210 months, or 17.5 years.

Of course, that doesn't take into account any future electricity price increases. It also doesn't take into account how, with the right system, you can keep up and running indefinitely the next time there is a grid blackout or winter storm that knocks out the power.

Re:How green is it?

[Rei]

While payback period may be the easiest measure to calculate, it's not a very good one. You really need to be calculating either IRR or mortgage length if you want to determine whether something is a good investment. They're different ways to measure the same thing. Basically, when you install something like a wind turbine or solar setup, you're buying an annuity. You need to show that that annuity is a better investment than other comparable investments on the open market.

Re:How green is it?

[fredklein]

Replying to myself to say:

if the above system seems a bit costly, try this:

$2,590 1 kW XL.1 Turbine, with PowerCenter
$1,595 60 ft. Tilt-up Tower
$450 .. 5.3 kWh Battery Bank (B220-4)
$1,044 1,500 W Inverter System

$5,679 Total Cost

$5679 = 29318 kwh, which is 30 months payback.

/of course 1000 watts is a little low for most people...

Re:How green is it?

[willy_me]

Try going here.

Re:How green is it?

[DerekLyons]

We have created an open source hardware project that makes power. It'll cost me $300 - $400 to make something I think is cool, will pay for itself over time, help reduce my footprint on the planet in an almost measurable way and let me do something creative.
 
You got a problem with that?

Yeah, I do. Because "building a cheap windmill" != "reducing your footprint", especially if you are making your blades out of materials that are energy intensive to produce (fiberglass), which also produces toxic waste to boot. Your windmill will be rusted junk long before it replaces the energy needed to create its components.
 
 

It has nothing to do with buying things. It has nothing to do with keeping up with the neighbors.

You're right - it's about none of those things. Nor is it about actually reducing your footprint. It's all about being kewl and open source and giving you a warm fuzzy feeling that you are Doing Something.
 
You want to reduce your footprint measurably? Don't build a windmill - instead, reduce your consumption of electricity to match that the amount the windmill would have provided.

Re:How green is it?

[Simon Brooke]

/of course 1000 watts is a little low for most people...

Indeed. But you don't need to cut yourself off from the gird; and, indeed, in Europe at least, when you have an excess (which you sometimes will) you can sell electricity back to the grid at a preferential price.

Re:How green is it?

[naveenoid]

Makes sense. Surely Adobe knows how to deal with "Flash"-Floods ;)

Re:How green is it?

[samael]

Solar's down to a 5 year payback in some areas. It's vastly more efficient than it used to be.

Re:How green is it?

[phaggood]

> fast moving blades

Well, not all windpower generators take their design from 300yr old Dutch models; some companies remember we're in the 21st century. On their website there's a picture of their system on a low-rise apartment building; it's so invisible it could placate the most rabid NIMBY-ite.

> free poultry

Some companies are even putting grates in front of their blades. I do find it amusing when people become so concerned about the fauna when you talk about renewables when they never care about the small animals taken out by transformer stations unless said animal 'terrorist' kills himself as a blow against human imperialism against his species.

Re:How green is it?

[Burz]

Whoa there... Since when does the market cost of the embodied energy of a product have anything to do with the cost to the environment (which is typically much more severe though less noticeable to the consumer)? We are in this climate change mess because the market cannot measure ecological value.

If the manufacturer can prove they use renewable energy for most materials and components in the windmill, then I'd buy the eco-friendly argument. Otherwise, the case still has to be made for the green properties of small-scale windmills.

Re:How green is it?

[OhPlz]

Same here. I'm usually hovering between 48 and 50 mpg with mine. I live in NH, we don't have super densely populated anything. I love the vehicle, but I'm not terribly fond of the people that go to great lengths to explain how it's "wrong". It's a car. It gets ~50 mpg if you don't drive it like you stole it. Learn to cope.

Re:How green is it?

[mpathetiq]

I live in and work for a city with four 1.8 megawatt turbines and can support that research with anecdotal evidence. The utilities director has informed me that the only things our turbines have killed are bats. The assumption is that the blades screw up the bats' echolocation. Even then, the numbers of bats that have been found are very minimal.

Wind Turbines

[eric76]

I've been wanting to do this on the family farm for years. My concern is not really about reducing power usage as it is about having power during the power failures that are not all that uncommon.

There is also a big push to put the big corporate wind turbines on the local farms. Those could easily make the difference between making a profit or losing money on a farming operation.

I spent yesterday afternoon and this morning at a local wind turbine construction site where they are putting up approximately 75 turbines this year. The owner of the land said he had been working for seven years just to get to the point where they are putting them in.

Re:Wind Turbines

[flyingfsck]

Household chargers can gen up to a kilowatt, if the mast is a few meters above the top of the roof

Buying One Myself

[Ferretman]

This is a great topic and I'm glad to see it pop up here. I'll be buying a wind turbine for the new house I'm building here in a couple of months.

The reason has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with "being green" or "sticking it to the man". I'm greener than your average bear and have found that "sticking it to the man" rarely works as well as one might have hoped.

Quite simply, I'll be five miles back from the nearest power line. I poked around and considered solar, but the idea of getting power production 24/7 rather than 5 or 6 hours per day closed the deal for me. My property is in an excellent wind zone (Cat 4 thru Cat 6, depending on which map you look at) and I'll be able to provide 120% of my power needs--excellent. Being able to provide all of my own needs and not be dependent on an ever-more-fragile grid is just a bonus that appeals mightily to the geek in me.

Turbines overall are great, though I've become convinced the industry is still at the "hand-built and tuned" phase the automotive industry was once in. It'll need more standardization before it can go mainstream in any significant fashion.

Great technology though.

Ferretman

Re:Buying One Myself

[flyingfsck]

Farms have been using wind power for centuries. If you have a bungalow at the sea side with permanent wind, then a simple DIY setup made from a 24V, 24 inch cooling fan for a stationery motor mounted on a post, can easily charge a 12V battery through a single diode to run lights and a small TV and the cost is really minimal if you keep it simple. My father did that for many years, till the grid finally caught up. (You need a diode, else you have a big cooling fan, instead of a charger...) If you are a geek with serious electricity needs, then you may need two or three of those, but that will still be cheaper than buying a single larger commercial unit.

Re:Buying One Myself

[evanbd]

I highly recommend some sort of battery charge controller. I happen to have used and like the MorningStar SunSaver models, but there are a wide variety out there. At $50 or so, they're not that expensive, and they'll make your battery last a lot longer, especially if you deep cycle it and let it charge completely often. A simple diode will work, but it will overcharge the battery and shorten its lifespan. Longer battery life will easily pay for the charge controller for most usage patterns.

Re:a little extra info

[zippthorne]

1) it's a state by state rule. Not all states are doing it.
2) there are provisions such that the buyback is reduced if more people take advantage of it
3) they don't pay you. They simply credit you for the appropriate amount of kWh. If you're below zero at the end of the month, they still don't pay you, and your bill won't actually be zero.

Re:a little extra info

[wvmarle]

Could the grid handle everyone pumping electricity back into the grid, especially with such a technology as wind, where the amount of power generated tends to be "bursty". Could this backfire a large percentage (> 25%) of homes started doing this? It already gives problems in areas like northern Germany and Denmark, where large quantities of wind power are installed. Wind force can drop from 4-6 bft (giving basically maximum output) to zero in a matter of minutes - that is barely enough time for conventional power production to step in, and may result in brown-outs or even black-outs. So yes we are talking about a serious issue here.

Solar has this issue as well, but bar a total solar eclipse even when clouds come, it will take quite a while for a spread-out set of solar cells to all become darkened, and even under clouds they produce quite some electricity.

Re:a little extra info

[oneedge]

As a NERC certified generation dispatcher, I can tell you for certain that in most cases you will not make a profit putting power back to the US grid, and there's a chance that you may never actually get an investment fully recouped without a state and/or federal rebate or some other program. This doesn't mean that it's a bad idea - just do it for the right reason.

Some issues that a small "Qualified Facility" has to address:

How do you measure the power you're putting to the grid? The standard issue power meters only flow in one direction - they don't spin backwards when you're generating more than you're using. They usually require you to install a special meter that requires routine calibration by a licensed professional.

There's a morass of legal requirements that must be met before you can get paid. Additionally, states have the ability to (and usually do) regulate the profit out of small home renewable energy sources below a certain output level, such as small wind, solar, geothermal, micro-hydro, etc... And above a certain output and you become classified as an "Independent Power Producer" - which opens up a larger can of legal worms. The issues go on and on...

Bottom line - if you're looking at this as a "get rich quick" scheme, I'm afraid you're going to be sadly disappointed. However, it DOES help by taking the some of the burden off of the greenhouse-gas-spewing power plants, and offsetting your own personal load on an already overloaded grid. Make sure you do your homework for your state and take full advantage of any rebate programs or tax incentives offered.

Homebrew 700 Watt Wind turbine

[drphilngood]

Heres an interesting project that I have always wanted to try: http://www.otherpower.com/wardmil.html

Re:a little extra info

[TooMuchToDo]

That's why you use nuclear for base load and wind/solar for peak load and other tasks. Example: In the midwest of the US, we've been pumping fossil aquifers dry over the last 100 years (fossil aquifers don't replenish themselves like other aquifers do). During the day, huge windfarms covering the midwest should pump power into the grid of standard use, and at night they should pump power in the grid to charge electric vehicles. Unused power should be used to condense water from the air and pumped underground to replenish these aquifers we're pumping dry).

Renewable energy rule: Always have a dump load that has a purpose. Don't burn that valuable energy off as heat.

20 years payback? WTF??

[zogger]

For a windcharger system? That's absurd...just out to lunch, 5 years is more like it, got to be something screwy going on here... /me checks specs on Acme wind turbines....

OK, spotted the problem right here down in the "included with package" list -> "100ft Acme MONSTER turbine cable"

Easier ways to make a much bigger impact

[RobinH]

Rather than generating more power a home, it's a lot easier to just use less. If you setup a rather simple energy monitoring system in your house (like $100 worth of equipment, etc.) you should be able to reduce your energy usage by 5% just through targetting. That includes using less water, gas, and electricity. Throw gasoline in there and you're really going to save money (and lower your carbon footprint).

If you really want to make a difference, spearhead an energy monitoring and targetting campaign at work. Disclaimer: I am in the business. Typical savings for industrial sites are in the 5 to 15% range, and for commercial sites are up to 25% savings. Find out how much your company spends on energy/utilities and you'll realize that's a big payoff. It's much bigger than installing some 0.5 m^2 swept area windmill that generates maybe 100W 30% of the time, and 500W 5% of the time, and needs an expensive inverter and lead acid batteries with limited life span.

If you are really stuck on doing something at home and you have air conditioning, you can get reasonably inexpensive 800W solar panels (they might generate 500W peak on a sunny day in northern climes) and then you could hook it directly to an old 12V marine air conditioner, with only a single 12V battery to balance the load. Then during really hot days you can generate electricity and use it immediately to cool your house, so you don't have the expense of storing the energy for later, and the expense (and maintenance and inefficiency) of an inverter to get back to 120 or 240VAC.

Re:a little extra info

[wvmarle]

Euhm, you are almost totally wrong. Sorry to say it so, but it's the case.

Nuclear is great indeed for a base load: but that's it, base load. It can not easily be switched on or off like a coal or gas fired plant, which can change load in a matter of minutes.

Your idea of using some power dump is nice, but electrical vehicles are not the place. How are you ever going to switch on and off their charging for a start? When the wind falls, these chargers should be switched off. That requires some sophisticated communications, and is quite error prone. And how are you going to get to work after a windless night, or a gusty night where your charger is switched on and off but mostly off?

Power dumps could be cold storage warehouses, as discussed on Slashdot a few years ago (sorry, no link). Other power dumps, used already in e.g. France which is over-reliant on nuclear, could be pumping up water to the top of a hill during the night, and let it run down during the day when necessary.

Wind power is unstable, and we have to live with that. As nuclear is only a base load, wind may be used during the night to power the cold storage warehouses, which don't mind having no power for an hour or so. But during the day you will need back-up from conventional sources, just to maintain reliability. So far we haven't found a sufficiently reliable renewable energy source do do it otherwise.

On top of that power dumps are nice but also have limited capacity, both in absorption and release of energy on demand. They can cover fluctuations measured in time spans of minutes to hours maybe - not the longer term fluctuations such as a windless week.

Re:a little extra info

[fredklein]

Not always true. There are two types of 'buy back'- One (netmetering) uses one meter that can go in both directions. If you are using more than you are producing, the meter goes forward. If you are producing more, it winds Backward. If it ends up at at a higher number at the end of the period (month/quarter/year), you pay for the net amount you used. If it ends up at at a lower number, you do NOT get paid for the extra you gave them.

The other way is to have 2 meters- one for what you use, and one for what you sell to them. Even though they only pay wholesale rates, it would be possible to sell them more than you use, and actually make money.

Those are some loooooong days

[Somegeek]

Except that your payoff time calcs are assuming that your windmill is generating 100% power every hour (34 hours per day?) all day, every day of the year. The wind doesn't just work that hard...

Re:Those are some loooooong days

[fredklein]

No, I did not factor in the amount of power produced. (I assumed it would be adequate.)

  What I calculated was how long it would take (at your current electric payments) to pay off the windpower equipment.

Actually, if you look, I assumed a house would use 1,000,000wh (1000kwh) per month. A 10,000w system could make this in 100 hours, or about 4 days. Of course, it won't be running at full power, but even at 1/4 power, it only needs 16 days to make all the power you need in a month.

/Or I royally screwed up the math. :-)

Re:a little extra info

[Simon Brooke]

Not always true. There are two types of 'buy back'- One (netmetering) uses one meter that can go in both directions. If you are using more than you are producing, the meter goes forward. If you are producing more, it winds Backward. If it ends up at at a higher number at the end of the period (month/quarter/year), you pay for the net amount you used. If it ends up at at a lower number, you do NOT get paid for the extra you gave them. The other way is to have 2 meters- one for what you use, and one for what you sell to them. Even though they only pay wholesale rates, it would be possible to sell them more than you use, and actually make money.

Whereas in Germany, and in some other European countries, they have to pay (quite a bit) you more for every KW/h you sell them than for the ones they sell you.

Actually if you have running water on your land a pelton wheel will typically give you more reliable and cheaper power than a wind turbine.

Re:a little extra info

[TooMuchToDo]

I'm unfamiliar with the nuclear power plants in Scotland, but I have to disagree with your statement that they go off-line unpredictably and for long periods (your case excluded). I surfed around the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission [http://www.nrc.gov/] website for half an hour, and the only failure of a reactor in the US was Three Mile Island [http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/3mile-isle.html]. Other than that, most reactors in the US hum away day and night, some for over 20 years. Nuclear is a low-carbon power source, and it's not that dangerous if handled properly. Unfortunately, renewables aren't going to be able to supply 100% of our power (at least here in the US), so luckily we can fall back on nuclear to provide our base load reliably.

Re:a little extra info

[Soldarith]

Correct.

Also important to note, here in the US, is that many states (such as PA) have laws that require electric companies to comply with residential renewable energy metering (aka "backward metering"). This backward metering comes at NO cost to the residential owner to ensure that the meters on their home are capable of accurately recording power sent back on-grid. There are also laws in place that state the electric company must pay the residential owner for the power they generate back to the grid (by subtracting it from their electric bill, etc).

Also, please, please, please look at your state incentives, rebates, offers, etc before you make a decision on renewable energy for your home. Go to http://www.dsireusa.org/ to learn more about your state's assistance and laws.

The downfall of solar power generation back to the grid that many consumers do not take notice of, until it is too late, is that the price per KW they generate during the day is substantially cheaper than evening power costs. What does this mean? It means that the electric company will pay you an (almost) absolutely ridiculously low price for KW you generate and return to the grid during the day. Why? Because during the height of your power production with solar (middle of the day), the power draw from the grid is not at it highest, therefore they have surplus. In the end, you will still be paying for grid power in the evenings. Any alternatives? Yes. Obtain a battery bank and store/use your energy when you need it and keep the extra energy your system generates for yourself. Because the chances are that selling it back to the electric companies will not save you any more than you storing/using it yourself in the evening.

Re:a little extra info

[Damvan]

"The standard issue power meters only flow in one direction - they don't spin backwards when you're generating more than you're using. They usually require you to install a special meter that requires routine calibration by a licensed professional."

Question for you. Southern California Edison installed the bidirectional meter to measure the electricity that I am using and sending back into the grid (3.2 kw netmetered PV system). This meter does spin backwards. They specifically had to remove my one direction meter to install this bidirectional meter. You are saying that this meter should require routine calibration? I should be bugging Edison to routinely calibrate my meter? No criticism, I would just like to know if they should calibrating it regularly or not. I don't seem to remember them ever calibrating a meter once is was installed.