I cannot help but think that current wind turbines are based on windmills and if you had a windmill then you could mill all the grain in the area so didn't need another one for a few miles. Thus the turbines in wind farms are placed far enough apart that they don't interact whereas what you need for maximum efficiency are turbines that are closely spaced but interact in a co-operative manner so you don't lose most of the wind energy passing by. You don't see small water-driven turbines in the middle of a wide river, you dam the river and drive the turbine with the entire flow. However a co-operative array of small turbines along the ridge of your roof seems to be an idea that only exists in my head so far.You see huge wind turbines in wind farms (my local turbines have tails by the way) and tiny turbines on yachts, it has always puzzled me that intermediate size turbines for houses are so scarce. But I concede that by the time you have avoided turbulence and complied with planning constraints you have probably eliminated a large number of domestic premises, possibly my own included as I see that siting the turbine on the boundary next to the field would not be allowed.Thanks for everybody's comments; It looks as if I may need to forget this idea for another couple of years, although I will have a look at the MCS website just in case.
... I would be interested in his evaluation of why this scientific paper is wrong.
Thinks for this @michaels; you can actually read the full publication here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096014812100344X . @Martyn1981 had more or less convinced me that I had taken leave of my senses so I would be interested in his evaluation of why this scientific paper is wrong.
The average Wind speed in my area appears to be about 25 km/h which is about 9.6 m per second or about 18.7 knots. It I take the Rutland 504 https://www.marlec.co.uk/product/12v-rutland-504-windcharger/#1439303689503-ca1e0ecc-5b43 as an example of a small (0.51 m diameter) conventional wind turbine it would give about 20 W at 18 knots and costs £390.
20 W alone isn't worth worrying about although I could aspire to more in winter when winds are stronger. But is it really beyond the bounds of possibility that we could go from where we are today to something that is economically viable and which we could use in multiples rather than singly?
QrizB said:I'm not sure quite how you did your wind speed conversion but 25km/h is only 6.9m/s or 13.5 knots, at which speed the rutland 504 generates 10 watts (£39/watt).
New plans have just been announced by the Government
DON'T assume your landlord covers you
Incl £2ish sun cream & £1.50 disposable BBQs