B&Q Wind Turbines (Merged Thread)

colinS

Flash Estivo

Any chance of seeing a pic or two of you turbine in action? There are not too many Windsave customers willing to come onto these forums and tell us how they are getting on. There is one customer (there is a pic posted on the selfsufficientish.com forum) who has been talked into putting the Windsave on a bungalow. The salesperson who did that is in the same class as the one who sold those bowler hats to Peruvian women.

Magyar

I don't think Windsave will tell you anything about windspeeds over your house, that's up to you to find out. It's all a case of buyer beware, I know it should be scammer beware, but as this week's budget showed, that's the UK of today.

magyar

colinS wrote: »

Magyar

I don't think Windsave will tell you anything about windspeeds over your house, that's up to you to find out. It's all a case of buyer beware, I know it should be scammer beware, but as this week's budget showed, that's the UK of today.

Just wondering if they even point out that you can get your postcode's windspeed data from the NOABL database
http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sources/renewables/renewables-explained/wind-energy/page27326.html

This of course doesn't tell you whether you're blocked by trees, houses, etc. but should give you an idea.

For example, mine is 5m/s at 10m level, which gives me a capacity factor of less than 10%, so in otherwords, the expected generation would be at most 100W.....

colinS

magyar,

I tried that website but it was too slow, I am on a public library computer and have limited time. Did it give you wind speeds for higher levels? 10 meters is about right for rooftop turbines like Windsave, but this is what makes them a waste of time (apart from Windsave also being a very bad design ). You should get a higher wind speed at a higher level; and as wind speed is the main thing, it is worth getting you turbine as high as possible. Houses are just too low, and their structural strength will not allow a high mast to be attached to them.

The other thing is that with wind turbines bigger is better. One 250kilowatt turbine is better than 250 one kilowatt turbines. One 2.5 megawatt turbine is better than 10 two hundred and fifty kilowatt turbines, but I think we are talking about urban wind turbines mostly on this thread and 2.5mw is too large for what I have in mind. This means it is better to part-own a medium seize turbine than own a small turbine. If we are more concerned with making money than making a statement - and this site is dedicated to making/saving money - putting a turbine on your house will never make money, as the results coming in from Windsave customers shows, it will only make a statement for you about your concern over global warming, and using renewable energy to counter it.

Cooperatives buying wind turbines is not a new idea, I think they have been doing it for quite a while now in Denmark, and I know of one wind turbine co-op here in the Uk. I think if a 250kilowatt turbine were to be developed for siting on high industrial buildings and unused brownsite land there would be people who would be willing to invest in wind co-ops, and I am sure the returns would be greater than house sited small wind turbines.

If putting small wind turbines on buildings can save you money, how comes B&Q have not put any Windsave turbines on their stores? They claim Windsave can save you up to 40% of your yearly electricity bill. Well, my local B&Q in Norwich would be ideal for a siting this turbine; it's got open land in front and you could probably put the turbine on a higher mast than for a house siting. But there were no turbines on the store the last time I looked. If they didn't want to use a Windsave turbine because it's a piece of junk, why not put a Proven turbine up. B&Q should practice what they preach, and they are preaching there is money to be made/saved in wind energy using small turbines.

If you are not connected to the grid, then small turbines can be worth using. But even though I live in a village I am on the grid, so for me small turbines are a hobby, and I make them for fun with no thought of financial gain

magyar

colinS wrote: »

Cooperatives buying wind turbines is not a new idea, I think they have been doing it for quite a while now in Denmark, and I know of one wind turbine co-op here in the Uk. I think if a 250kilowatt turbine were to be developed for siting on high industrial buildings and unused brownsite land there would be people who would be willing to invest in wind co-ops, and I am sure the returns would be greater than house sited small wind turbines.

Colin, you're right that on a small scale, co-operatives are the way to go. There are many co-ops in the UK actually; owning everything from small (<1 MW) turbines right up to 20-30MW schemes.

One, for example, is Baywind, www.baywind.co.uk, for example.

Small co-operatives are always going to have problems with planning issues that a larger co-op could manage to work through as it could probably afford a proper environmental statement etc.

gromituk

colinS wrote: »

10 meters is about right for rooftop turbines like Windsave

If I am not mistaken, it's totally unrealistic for a rooftop turbine, because of all the disruption (turbulence) caused by the roof. I think the figures only apply away from buildings, trees, etc.

B&Q should practice what they preach

Oh please no. They'll put up children's windmills like a Sainsbury's I saw recently, and what David Cameron has done - counter-productive greenwash.

colinS

magyar,

Thanks for the baywind address, I haven't kept up to date with wind co-ops.

Gromituk,

I didn't mean the wind speed was right, I meant the height was about right for the Windsave. But you are right about turbulance around the rooftop, and I believe it is the root cause of the problems with the Windsave turbine. I am sure that the Windsave turbine does not furl (please, can anybody confirn this, I have given the tail of a display turbine at B&Q a push and it doesn't move. I can not see any hinging mechanism). This means the makers of this turbine rely on braking to stop the alternator burning out. But furling would be easier, and I am sure that at one time the Windsave furled, probably the model that had a boom wit the tail attached to it. I think the reason that the turbine now doesn't furl it they found that the eddying currents around the roof made furling as a control a waste of time. All this is pure speculation on my part, but as Windsave aren't very eager give out technical details, so speculate is all we can do about their product.

For people still thinking about installing a turbine on their house they might like to visit ww.fieldlines.com go to the wind section and look at the post by shadow on the two turbines he has just had destroyed. If you look up his stories, one titled firebird will show a picture of the turbine he built. I think he should have made it a bit less arty, but it is no Mickey Mouse turbine, and he knows quite a bit about making turbines.

One more thing, should we call these turbines house top turbines? The roofs of high buildings could be a bit more suitable for siting.

[Deleted User]

I heard on the gravepive the other day that the EST (Energy Saving Trust) is looking to withdraw the grants that are avialable on current qualifying microturbines like the Windsave and the Swift..

The reason is twofold, 1) They have finally come to realise that the quoted output and actual outputs achieved from these current microturbines are almost in every case well below the minimum requirement (which I think is 500kWh output per annum) for a qualifying grant and 2) that the turbines are in many cases not suitable from a structural point of view.

Anyway if the grants are removed then payback periods are going to get even worse (assuming you can call perhaps a payback period of c. 25years + good to start with).

Freddix

Cardew

freddix wrote: »

I heard on the gravepive the other day that the EST (Energy Saving Trust) is looking to withdraw the grants that are avialable on current qualifying microturbines like the Windsave and the Swift..

The reason is twofold, 1) They have finally come to realise that the quoted output and actual outputs achieved from these current microturbines are almost in every case well below the minimum requirement (which I think is 500kWh output per annum) for a qualifying grant and 2) that the turbines are in many cases not suitable from a structural point of view.

Anyway if the grants are removed then payback periods are going to get even worse (assuming you can call perhaps a payback period of c. 25years + good to start with).

Freddix

Of course if you factor in the cost of borrowing money(or loss of interest) there will never be a payback - they cost you money to run.

Whilst the principle of grants for alterative energy is to be applauded; it is a disgrace that taxpayers money is poured into the coffers of firms who produce rubbish.

colinS

The Energy Saving Trust is at last looking into the viability of these turbines, but it won't publish its results until June. That is like closing the stable door after the horse has crapped all over the living room floor. It's bloody disgusting that the government should not to fully test these things before they put out money into them. It hasn't even made Windsave produce independent verified data for their turbine, and we still have no house that has produced 500kh per year using a Windsave turbine.

But I don't think too many Windsave buyers have received a grant, because the monthly amount given away is a so small you have to get your claim in on the stroke of midnight on the last day of the month to have a chance of getting anything.

The hidden future costs of these turbines should also be taken into account when working out their payback time, these are: a maintainance contract, possible higher house insurance premiums, and the cost of taking the things down when these first two costs become too high to pay or the local council revokes the planning permission due to public outcry.

Flash_Estivo

colinS wrote: »

Flash Estivo

Any chance of seeing a pic or two of you turbine in action? There are not too many Windsave customers willing to come onto these forums and tell us how they are getting on. There is one customer (there is a pic posted on the selfsufficientish.com forum) who has been talked into putting the Windsave on a bungalow. The salesperson who did that is in the same class as the one who sold those bowler hats to Peruvian women.

Magyar

I don't think Windsave will tell you anything about windspeeds over your house, that's up to you to find out. It's all a case of buyer beware, I know it should be scammer beware, but as this week's budget showed, that's the UK of today.

Here you go :-
http://www.pbase.com/tim_bateman/image/73753972

Also the wind speed at 10m is 5.4 according to the NOABL database.