Michael Loje wrote:From what I understand, there are still a few technical problems to be worked out. First, the propeller is coupled to the generator by means of a gearbox. That gearbox requires regular maintenance. That maintenance requires removal of the propeller and superstructure. If the gearbox fails, the machine basically self-destructs. That is one of the reasons they are built in wide-open areas. When a "direct coupled" machine becomes available, not requiring a gearbox, they will be much more trouble free. As far as "free" power goes, that assumes the machine and the labor to install it are donated. Assuming it is not donated, the real payback time is sixteen years, or eight years with tax credits. Any gearbox maintenance, which is basically a construction project, would add to that.
Michael
Don Farris has been a huge fan of wind power and that was one of the cornerstones of
Savannah's Peninsula projects, windmills out in the lake where they would catch the
most wind. I believe she had 16 smaller wind turbines.
But the truth, right now, as with many green things is when you add in the cost, the
carbon footprint for making the turbine. The massive cranes and or helicopters to
build, and the fact that they do start to breakdown in as little as five years makes it
pretty unrealistic today, but five or ten years from now?
So where do we put them?
.