B&Q Wind Turbines (Merged Thread)

gromituk

kittiwoz wrote:

In that case it is probably high time you took the side off your computer and hoovered the fan.

Bit difficult with a laptop

Of course you should also run regular virus checks which is a kind of routine maintanence but I suspect you do actually do that even if you claim not to.

I run Linux through a firewall. I don't have to.

gromituk

BaJi wrote:

He said that wind turbines are very popular in Holland

Relatively speaking, I guess. I've just cycled 150 miles in The Netherlands and I didn't see a single one.

kittiwoz

BaJi wrote:

Eh, thanks. You could have just written the paragraph that begins with the above sentence and I would have known what you were talking about then saved yourself half an hour's typing. But thanks anyway.

I don't see how. You asked how turbulence was defined and I tried to explain that in the paragraph that begins with Reynolds number which is a key concept in the definition of turbulent flows. I used the example of a river to try and make it more understandable. That's also the paragraph where I tried to explain a little why surrounding buildings cause turbulence although I know I didn't actually explain the flow mechanics of that.

The paragraph you mention pretty much boils down to "turbulence is bad for wind turbines".

The bit on CFD wasn't really necessary but I just wanted to give a sense of the high level of difficulty involved in working out the behaviour of turbulent flow fields and how recently it has become possible (only within the last few decades.)

I didn't answer your question on vertical axis wind turbines because I don't know the answer and I didn't want to pretend I did. It wasn't an avoidance. I don't see how vertical axis wind turbines would solve or be exempt from the problems associated with turbulence however. I know they don't have to be re-aligned to face the wind but since horizontal axis machines can be and are realigned to face the wind and it is a system which works successfully I don't really see that that is such a great selling point. That being the case I don't see why it would be prefferable to have a vertical axis turbine rather than a horizontal axis one.

gromituk

Reading the windpower sites, I inferred that that the nacelles on large generators are turned by motors to face the wind, rather than naturally by the wind itself. Shame about the extra complication caused by this.

BaJi_2

gromituk wrote:

Relatively speaking, I guess. I've just cycled 150 miles in The Netherlands and I didn't see a single one.

I'm sorry to hear that, maybe you'll see one next time.

BaJi_2

kittiwoz wrote:

The bit on CFD wasn't really necessary but I just wanted to give a sense of the high level of difficulty involved in working out the behaviour of turbulent flow fields and how recently it has become possible (only within the last few decades.)

That was my point. I could write similar stuff on semiconductor simulations but one has to remember one's audience.;)

kittiwoz wrote:

I didn't answer your question on vertical axis wind turbines because I don't know the answer and I didn't want to pretend I did. It wasn't an avoidance. I don't see how vertical axis wind turbines would solve or be exempt from the problems associated with turbulence however. I know they don't have to be re-aligned to face the wind but since horizontal axis machines can be and are realigned to face the wind and it is a system which works successfully I don't really see that that is such a great selling point. That being the case I don't see why it would be prefferable to have a vertical axis turbine rather than a horizontal axis one.

I wanted to remind you of the question. I've read that vertical axis machines are affected less by turbulance. I guess we both need to do a little more research.

kittiwoz

I'm sorry. I'm intellectually curious and I tend to assume other people will also be. If I was asking you about semi conductors I would want you to tell me if it was a relatively recently established field in which one could still not get definite answers and good approximations only with considerable difficulty or a well established field where all the problems were well understood and explained leading to accurate predicting. It seems, and I have noticed this increasingly in many threads, that it does not do to assume the users of these fora are sufficiently intelligent that they might take a scientific interest or have any comprehension of how science relates to everyday problems and that it only causes offence and argument. If they prefer to be patronised I'm sure there are plenty of people willing. I'm bowing out.

BaJi_2

kittiwoz wrote:

I'm sorry. I'm intellectually curious and I tend to assume other people will also be. If I was asking you about semi conductors I would want you to tell me if it was a relatively recently established field in which one could still not get definite answers and good approximations only with considerable difficulty or a well established field where all the problems were well understood and explained leading to accurate predicting. It seems, and I have noticed this increasingly in many threads, that it does not do to assume the users of these fora are sufficiently intelligent that they might take a scientific interest or have any comprehension of how science relates to everyday problems and that it only causes offence and argument. If they prefer to be patronised I'm sure there are plenty of people willing. I'm bowing out.

This is the problem with scientific arguments. The public don't pressure the politicians to make sensible decisions because they, the public, are ignorant of the facts. I don't think intelligence is a problem, it is just the facts are unfamiliar to them.

[Deleted User]

Please excuse me but I am new to the moneysaving thread and this is my first post. I have followed the microgeneration development with interest and have just sent this to Windsave.

The below was sent to Windsave on the 18th October.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I have recently visited B&Q and noted that they are now retailing your product the WS-1000.

I have both a private and commercial interest in micro wind generation and wanted some more details from you on how you calculate your pay back figures and the general tone of your marketing material.

I am concerned that you are misleading potential consumers about the overall level of saving and payback periods that you claim your WS-1000 system can provide.

My concern is based on the fact that if a number of consumers purchase your product and it doesn't deliver to their expectations that it could be very damaging to micro generation for the future. I would like to see growth in micro generation and plan to install micro generation technology when the figures properly add up.

As it stands your marketing material points very strongly to a 5 - 7 year payback period and an in store promotional video (running in B&Q) had a statement being made that annual savings of up to £200 can be expected.

Taking into consideration a maximum potential grant of 30% a purchaser will still be faced with a net cost of £1050.

You state that based on average wind speeds of 5.8m/s and at a height of 10m the system will generate on average 1/3rd of an average households electricity requirements, which you go on to state would be 3300kWh. The WS-1000 should therefore generate c. 1100kWh per annum on average for an average household.

DTI figures showed that The average unit cost for electricity for 2005 is 8.67p.
On this basis the WS-1000 would generate the equivalent to £95.37 worth of electricity. Can you please confirm that this figure is correct based on my statements above, which I have taken from your website and marketing material.

Does you average power output take into account differences between dense residential areas and open countryside?

I am aware that you state a survey will be carried out prior to installation to check for suitability of a site, but what checks are undertaken.

You then state that there is the ROC element that can be claimed back at an approximate value of £60.

I believe that ROC values for single ROCs are not at this level and that administrative costs for a domestic user applying for just a single ROC would eat up most of this value.

I am sure you will know the real costs and retained profit for a domestic user to claim a single ROC. Can you please confirm this figure.

If it is the case that there is little retained margin from a ROC then your proposed payback periods of 5-7 years is misleading along with your statement of £200 per annum savings.

I am aware that allowances should be made for rising electricity prices and I would be interested to know what increases you have applied to help "improve" your payback figures.

You also stated that the product comes with a 2 year warranty and a 10 years expected working life. What components do you anticipate will need replacing and servicing during the 10 year working life. I cannot believe that the product is expected to run completely maintenance free over this entire period of time without some form of maintenance. What are the anticipated costs for this, which must be offset against any savings and potential payback periods?

I wish you to understand that I am requesting the above in order to satisfy myself that your are not being misleading about your product. If you can substantiate your claims then I might well look to buy your product myself. However if I do not receive a response or I receive a response that is lacking in sufficient detail I will be looking to take my concerns to the advertising standards authority and B&Q.
Yours faithfully

Noutram

One of the issues is the payback or ROI of alternatives –until energy is painfully expensive or scale effects bring costs down this will always be a long period. Let’s hope we are not caught in an energy crunch with spiralling raw materials and replacement costs as described here: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Incidentally I have designed my own solar heating system that should cost about £250 to make and am building a proof of concept prototype. Assuming I spend £100 / year on hot water that's a ROI of 2.5 years. OK, you need to do a bit of DIY but I am a computer person not a timber man / plumber and so I designed it for simplicity of build / installation. These things are not rocket science.


Nick.