****************** INFORMATION CORRECTION FROM THE VIDEO CREATOR******************** Some of you eagled-eyed viewers have pointed out a discrepancy in the arithmetic in a cost comparison between a solar farm and an installation of turbines, which was originally featured at the halfway point in this video. Having spoken directly with the folks at Alpha 311 we have established that, while the bottom-line cost comparisons were correct, there was a syntax error in the original presentation document from which the comparison was taken, and there was some key data that I had not included in my commentary which would have clarified how the calculations had been made. It’s not possible to add a new section to a video once it has been posted on RUclips, but it is possible to delete certain sections, so I have now removed the comparison slide, and it no longer features in the video. I am however conscious that some of you would like to understand what the accurate numbers really are. So here they are : Cost comparison : A 3MW solar farm on 15 acres of land, consisting of 12,000 panels at 250W per panel, with a 25 year ‘Power Purchase Agreement’ at an agreed cost of between 4.7pence and 6.3pence per kWh, giving an overall 25 year cost range of between £38.2m and £51.3m Versus An installation of 125 turbines along an existing 4.5km stretch of motorway with a monthly lease cost (including installation and lifetime maintenance) of £29,000, giving a full 25-year cost of £8.7m. Calculations: A 3MW Solar installation receiving 6 hours of useable sunlight each day (averaged across a year) works out like this: 3000kW x 6hrs = 18,000kWh per day In the original document the turbine installation was also quoted as having a 3MW generating capacity. This was INCORRECT. I also omitted an important power generation graph that was included in the company’s original presentation to me. That graph came from the external test house and it showed that the turbines have a maximum rotational speed of 420RPM in a wind speed of 19m/s, giving a maximum generating capacity of 6kW, (which by the way, is well within the capacity of the turbine’s alternator, which is rated at 13kW) 125 turbines at 6kW per turbine = 750kW total capacity (NOT 3MW as originally stated) Wind Turbine maximum capacities are based on an assumption of constant wind speed over 24 hours (just like solar panel maximum capacities are based on the assumption that it will always be sunny during operating hours). The sums for the turbine installation therefore work out like this : 750kW for 24 hrs = 18,000kWh per day So, although the generating capacity of the turbines is less than the solar farm, the rated available operating time is 4 times greater. That means that the overall generating capacities for the 2 installations are indeed comparable. Alpha 311 have conducted extensive testing on their turbines with external test houses over a three-year period prior to investing heavily in tooling to set up production on multi-million-dollar contracts with large corporations who, you can be assured, will have done their own due diligence on their investments before signing on the dotted line. The folks at Alpha 311 assure me that they have seen the operational performance of their turbines with their own eyes, and they stand by their numbers 100%. Ultimately, unless you enjoy standing in a court room being sued for misinformation and breach of contract, it is generally sensible to ensure your product ‘does what it says on the tin’, and having now spoken at length with the Chief Executive of the company, I am satisfied that Alpha 311 are acting in good faith. I would also like to directly address the less savoury comments from one or two very ‘animated’ commentators who felt the need to post multiple defamatory comments about me personally. For the record…I am not affiliated in any way with Alpha 311. This video was not funded, sponsored, or paid for in any way by Alpha 311. I have never, and will never, accept any payment or sponsorship from any company for any services or endorsements on any of my videos. I have never, and will never, monetise any of my videos. So, this video, just like all my videos, attracts ZERO revenue for me. There is absolutely NO incentive at all for me to intentionally post spurious information. I am however a human being, not a robot. Occasionally I make mistakes like everyone else. And when I do, I always hold my hands up and do my best to make reparations. I hope I have managed to do so in this instance., Many thanks. Dave Borlace (Just Have a Think channel operator)
Great work Dave, I must admit my first thought was that this was a variation on the 'turbine on the car roof' concept. Glad to see it's really a great idea. Ignore the pinheads, the hard of thinking will always be there.
Dear Dave, it is highly appreciated that you acknowledge and correct the error. However, 6kW out of a two meter tall VAWT turbine at 19 m/s is impossible, even if this particular company should have revolutionized VAWT design, as there simply is not that much energy available in a swept area of that size. A VAWT calculator (there are several available) will show max figures of 2.6 kW @ 19m/s. But 19 m/s is a GALE wind speed. At a 'normal' wind speed of 5.4 the power output would be a lousy 60-70 watt (see below for the calculation). Icewind.is is making a similar-sized VAWT the RW500, which is rated at 500W at 10 m/s. So 6 kW @ 19 m/s appears to be in error. The formula for VAWT wind energy is Power=1/2*Area*Air Density*velocity^3 Assuming a turbine 2 meters tall and 1.2 m wide, at sea level air density, we get 1/2*2*1.2*1.3*19^3 = 10700W, and at 30% efficiency we get 3kW before losses, NB at a Gale wind. 5.4 m/s gives 74 watt at 30% efficiency. I'm sorry to say that I believe there is more correction to be done here, E.g. at 5:30 where you still claim 5.4 m/s yields 2500 watt per generator.
The cost of a 3mw solar farms is about 2,9m euro. Canadian solar (glas/film) Solaredge transformer with duo optimerzers. 3,1m euro if you raise them higer for sheep graizing. All prices without groundfee (2.5k/ha - 6k/ha) Alpha 311 has a great concept, hope it works. Look beter then solar farms.
Thanks for the correction, there is still a few giant problems though: The first one should not be controversial, because we will assume that all of alpha 311's numbers are correct: They claim that 1 turbine produces 6kwh per day, and 125 turbines will produce 750kwh per day, and that this would make their installation equivalent to a 3mw solar farm. The "capacity factor" (the actually generated energy per year divided by the nameplate capacity working at full load for 1 year continously) for solar power in the UK is 10% (because of night time and clouds etc - it can be as high as 29% in other countries). This means that in the UK a 3mw capacity solar farm will only generate 300kw on average throughout the year. Per day this will still produce 300kw*24h = 7200kwh. And 7200kwh is 9.6x more than the 750kwh being produce by the 125 turbines. So the solar farm and the turbines are not equivalent at all in fact the solar farm would be almost 10x more productive... Even in the UK which is not great for solar. And because the price advantage of the turbines was not better than 10:1 in their misleading calculation, it follows that solar is alot cheaper than this type of wind energy. It doesnt make sense for alpha 311 to give the solar farm a 25% capacity factor (6 out of 24 hours per day - which is actually still too high for the UK and most places) but then give their wind turbine no or a 100% capacity factor, when they compare their turbine to solar power - Especially since they assume extremly high and RARE windspeeds of 19m/s which will give them a very high max capacity but a very small capacity factor. When they then say a turbine will only produce 6kwh per day, theyre admitting that the turbine only has a 1/24 or 4.17% capacity factor - which is alot worse than solar and at lower installed capacity. - Such a low capacity factor makes sense for their turbine though because its high max capacity relies on such strong and rare winds. (6kwh per day at 6kw installed max capacity = 1/24 capacity factor) I also wanted to show that the 6kw is unrealistic even for 19m/s winds - again easy basic physics, but this comment is already very long and tzenophile already did that calculation above - He was extremly generous as well when he assumed a 2x1.3m blade size which is more than 2x larger than what can be seen in alpha 311's advertisement (alpha-311.com/ )- only one side of the turbine produces power, because the other half is moving INTO the wind... - So take the turbines width divided by 2 to get the relevant blade width. Anyways - maybe try to fix these giant errors - a 10x mistake that lets them outperform solar with super misleading and stupid calculations is not acceptable on your great channel!!! Love you and your channel, Cheers.
I keep hearing this… the point that was made at the very end… people want to put down any idea for energy generation that is small and local by pointing out how it can’t possibly replace the large central energy producers we currently have. As pointed out, people need to embrace these “complementary” sources of energy. Energy in the future has to come from many sources, not just one huge monopolistic fossil fuel power source. We need to keep inventing, innovating and thinking of new ways. Use them all.
6kwh per day*356days a year = 2.136 MWh. 1MWh of electricity in the grid costs £40. Say these turbines last 15 years througout their entire life they produce a whopping £85*15 = £1275 WOW! Problem solved, we just need to install these £3k turbines, £1k electronics and £500 installation costs and in mere 53years each one will pay for itself and will start producing energy for consumers. If of course, it will survive that long.
@@makerbeelab5546 average construction cost for a natural gas power plant is $800/kw production capacity. These power plants are government subsidized in many ways, sometimes including completely waived startup costs. The lifespan of a generator is 15-20 years WITH REGULAR MAINTENANCE. Most plants have about 50 people in operation and maintenance, each paid between $40-$130k/year. That's $4.2 million a year in wages alone... now add nearly $400 million for a startup cost to power a single city for 15-20 years. 800 of these wind turbines in the upper range would cost 2.4 mil and produce 1600MWh/year, the same a coal plant produces in a day... oh... wow, youre right, we should totally go with coal, which burns 2.2 tons of coal per household every year, turning the surrounding area into a superfund site that takes over $200 billion and decades to clean up, and thats if they ever get around to it considering there are over 270 superfund sites and growing faster than we can even make the money to clean them up, and that's if, of course, WE even survive that long. But if you think its cheaper to just push the poison on to your next of kin to clean up, who am I to argue... I dont have kids, YOUR kids can do it! I believe in their weakening bones!
If you waste a lot of money on a supposed wind energy system that returns almost zero electricity, you will just be throwing money away, and be let down when it breaks. I am in wind energy. We have a 10 kW turbine here that pays the electric bill. The installation was here when I bought the place during a recession. After it broke I got a new (used) one for pennies on the dollar. Now on my third one at this location. They weigh half a ton, not including the tower, and cost thousands of dollars and a crane just to lower it for service. Even then, it's a tough case to make versus just paying the electric bill. Best case scenario is you might break even versus paying your electric bill if you got the turbine for free and know how to maintain and repair it. Until it breaks down, then you are stuck paying thousands to remove it. That is using the only brand on the market that can even stay running. You could buy a house for the same money and rent it out, paying your electric bill many times over. Everything else in small-wind is a complete joke. Do not believe any output claims on Ebay etc. Complete junk, all lies. Too many failure modes. Made for average winds, small wind turbine self-destruct in storms.
@@jjrichardson5434 Centralized and huge, or small and independent, they all have to generate enough electricity to pay for themselves. Utility-scale machinery has passed the "does it even work?" test. Any whacky small turbine is just some crackpot's experiment, and they never work well, and self-destruct in the first storm.
I love your videos. Always solid content but I especially like your soft manner of speaking, quickly moving through the facts without repeating yourself. You quickly cover all sides to the story. Pros and cons. Thank you.
Soft speaking yes, but all sides of story really? Pros and cons? What con did he list except "it's unproven"? All the numbers seem garbage: 1 turbine can generate 2.5 kW under typical conditions (at 5:26) but 125 of them make a 3MW power station (at 8:44)? Furthermore, apparently this 2.5kW turbine can only generate 6kWh each day?? (at 5:48). Every month that's 180 kWh for a turbine that is rented for 232 GBP per month (at 9:20)! Check your electricity bill and tell me if 1.29 GBP per kWh is a good price... Either there has been some mixup in the numbers or that's a scam...
@@N4w4k You're right, the real wattage for a VAWT this size is 25 w. Some of us has been making this point since just 1-2 hours after the video release, but Dave is not listening. Extremely disappointing, especially given all the viewers who actually believe this nonsense.
'Dulcet tones' is the expression we would use in our house, I totally agree wi you of a wonderfully engaging voice, if only my teacher in school talked like this, I reckon I'd of paid a lot more attention and learnt a lot more. Excellent vid.
I live in Southern California where we have lots of wind. I’ve been watching the development of these wind turbines for over 10 years and finally they are getting small enough to make it feasible to put on top of houses. If we had these along our freeway systems, imagine the energy produced!
With LA's gridlock, they'll probably work in reverse. Lol. Sorry, just had to hank your chain. Would love to see California give fossil furls the finger by mass implementation of these, solar, and other renewable energy methods. AND how to recycle and reuse the materials that they are constructed from.
They use this technique in Japan to keep roadside reflectors clean. The have little rotating brushes on the reflectors that are powered by traffic wind.
Great video as always. Thank you. I wonder if the same idea could be used in the London Underground given the amount of air that is pushed through the tubes at speed. Food for thought.
Think of all the sound-protection-walls near autobahns and rails... - there’s got to be a way to make use of that energy instead of just dissipating it... - how about some nano piezoelectric thingies?
Indeed, John Davey. The little wind turbines would spin like crazy when trains are going by, but they'd also spin more slowly and continuously from the constant breeze that comes from the temperature difference between the tunnels and the surface.
The wind in the tunnels as the trains push the air through. If you’ve ever been in a tube station as a train approaches, you can feel it. Line them all along the walls of the tunnel.
The tube is a semi-closed air system though, unlike motorways. Probably more engineering involved to make sure the turbines don't interfere with the train's airflow, making it less cost-effective than placing those turbines elsewhere. The opposite may be true though, making it hyper-effective and energy efficient.
@@lawsonhelpme Agreed, except it should probably be, "EVEN less cost-effective". These things (VAWT) will never be cost-effective. How do I know? They were invented 100 years ago, and companies keep reinventing them, before going out of business. They look cute, though.
I have some decorative “wind spinners” and was surprised at how much they spin. I didn’t realize how much the air moves where I live. I would love to see these VAWTs produced for use by houses.
@@profribasmat217 I find it really funny when trolls mock the very power source farmers have been using for centuries to do the grunt labor of pumping water. You, sir, are the dipstick.
Nina, you're right on. If you wanted to power your yard lights and such by harnessing local gusts and storing that energy in lithium cells, much like how those little solar walkway lights work, then absolutely give it a go. Heck, if you have enough of them, you might even be able to offset your home lights. Power storage is pricey if bought new, but it can be a fun learning experience if you're willing to think outside the retail store.
Any electric motor, though some are better than others, can be used as an electric generator. My suggestion would to use an old alternator. Though since any motor will work, I suggest a broken power tool or old DVD player motor.
Yes, but connect them to a generator with an electrical load on it and you immediately need a lot of torque to spin those blades. I had a hand-cranked generator (a test box of some kind for checking insulation I guess), and open circuited, you could spin the handle with little effort, but if you put a dead short across it, it was almost impossible to spin the thing. Obviously, with ordinary loads it was easier but still took effort.
I don't think I've ever seen a RUclips channel that the world desperately needs before. I've also never seen a RUclips channel where I learn something compelling with each video.
I thought of this back in the nineties while sitting at a red light in the left turn lane. Large truck were going by at high speed and actually shaking my car with their turbulence. My idea was to turn soda pop cans into turbines and line them up on top of the concrete fences that edge our freeways in the US. There could be a mini-turbine every 6-12 inches.
Try riding a motorcycle on the highway with semi-trucks blowing past you. There's some real turbulence that almost blows you off the road along with the prevailing wind that whips you around.
IDEA!!!!,, Having grown up in down town Boston, one of the things that always look me by surprise was the huge wind currents you would encounter just walking around the huge buildings downtown. Mounting these types of generatos on the sides of key building in a city would make sense.
can't be done, buildings are engineered for certain levels of wind stresses. you can't just add things to them that would cause more. people on this channel don't tend to think things through.
You can add the vertical types on outrigging between the buildings to offset cooling systems. Any help is of great benefit, and the vortices between the buildings would be a terrific source for tight deployments similar to what was shown on the vid.
@@Withnail1969 Then you don't attach them to the buildings. One above an intersection would,power the LED traffic lights easily. One on every light pole. New poles with stacks of them at particularly windy places. Also, some mounted on the street level corners of buildings I doubt would compromise their integrity. Noise could be a problem for offices at lower levels though. Another windy place is some parking garages.
But, if you use it to generate electricity, you are using fossil fuel to generate electricity. Rather using the wind of trucks, will cause as much extra gas usage as the power you generate. It's non ecological and stealing fuel from drivers.
@@zazethe6553 You missed the comment about this in the video. The energy is already being put into the air by passing vehicles whether there is a generator absorbing some of this energy or not. There is no feed back to the vehicle so energy isn't being 'stolen' from them any more than the act or punching a hole in the air that happens whatever surrounds the vehicle..
@@dacutler actually, there is a feedback loop, it's just that we cannot imagine it. By using the energy the cars have to work harder to generate wind energy, because it introduces resistance and the cars have to push harder into the air. Every kwh you retrieve from it would increase the gass burning by 1 kwh.
@@zazethe6553 Are you saying that from experience? How does the use of energy that is being created anyway, feed back into demanding more from the engine.? The turbine isn't creating a greater headwind as the car has passed before it gets to the turbine. Also, why are you saying the energy absorbed by the turbine is exactly the same as the energy you say is demanded from the car? It's an open system, and, even if you are right, it's extremely unlikely the energy absorbed is the same as produced.
@@zazethe6553 , permit me to disagree. The turbines are not attached to the vehicles, consequently, they would not increase the drag on the vehicles. Additionally, unlike dams they do not generate their power by creating a barrier, restricting matter in motion. They merely tap into that already existing flow or displacement which every moving object causes. I also mention that the air would be generated from the "slipstream" of the cars at the edge of the road, where there is no possibility that that slipstream is leading to increased efficiency by following vehicles. This idea is GREAT! Why isn't it my idea?
Great minds think alike! I came up with the same idea in 2019 after driving up the M6 and seeing the opportunity to harvest the wasted airflow. I’m just glad that someone had the initiative to act upon their ideas, unlike myself 👍
So many houses around here are having their chimney stacks removed and tiled over flush with the roof as they move away from coal. I quite fancy the idea of chopping the chimney stack and replacing it with one or two of these.
This is actually a great idea, because if done good, it wouldn´t even disturb the aestetics of the houses, plus providing energy (maybe not much, but better than nothing for probably low cost and cheap maintenance).
@@Suthriel Not likely. The spinning blade or blades creates a harmonic that is transmitted through the structure of the building and cannot not only be annoying but can also eventually cause structural issues. Better to put it on it's own self supported pole.
Even without planes, the amount of wind that airports will experience will be very high anyway. So definitely a very good place to install them regardless.
it looks like the maximum speed the turbines can safely spin at is about 40 miles per hour. You'd want to be very careful in placement if you put them near the airplane spin up area so that the backdraft from the planes didn't exceed the rotational velocity of 40mph or you'd just burn out the breaks faster (wasting energy) or destroy the turbines. But yeah, putting them in and around airports for traffic flow and on some of the posts inside the airport runway areas would generate a ton of electricity.
I have watched this channel on and off for a while now. The presentation is always educational and well put across. I found this episode to be very interesting and these turbines appear to show great promise. Thank you for producing such a great channel.
Are you kidding, this is Nuts. Calculate the numbers! cars produce some wind in their direction, creating a tail wind, now if you almost stop that wind, the cars are subject to higher drag. Essentially you transfer the additional power cars must use to the dismally inefficient turbines, how stupid is this. The net result is an increased fuel consumption, energy not recoverable. The power required to overcome is (velocity - tailwind)³ × density × frontal area× drag coefficient Cd ~ 0.3, A little tail wind, car column generated reduces power enourmously!
@@arturoeugster7228 The advantage of driving behind another vehicle is that the lead vehicle reduces headwind for the car behind. This is surely not affected much by turbines on the side of the road which only harvest the spill-over wind that escapes from the roadway...?
@@petersonners4626 When there is no wind, then the only source of energy are the cars, not efficient, surely but still , the cars end up driving the turbines. Make a test circuit indoors and all this can be measured, on reduced scale models if necessary. Is is elementary physics. Which is not a 'fortée' of this channel. Even with the best possible configuration, long slender optimally twisted blades, the efficiency to extract the wind energy is never higher than 16/27, minus the skin friction of the blades and the drag of the nacelle and tower. the condition is as follows The air tube reduces the wind speed to ⅔ windspeed, where the plane of the blades is, then in the after flow to ⅓ windspeed, This is the famous Betz optimum, accordingly the initial inflow mass has a crossectional area of ⅔ the blade area and the trailing low speed area is 3 times the small area in front. Any time the blade angles are changed the trailing velocity is above ⅓ wind speed, never ever less . vertical axis turbines fare far worse, because of the large friction losses, but who cares there is enough wind area any way, as long as there is not interference of turbines operating behind others. Even a long distance apart . But road side arrangement as shown , with no cars and modest wind do interfere. I maintain that this is 'Nuts'.
By the way the optimum power, given by Betz, neglecting all drag sources is P = (16/27) × density/2 × Wind³ × blade swept area same as P = (2/3 Wind)³ × density × blade swept area same as (2/3 Wind) × Force pushing on the tower
I've seen this idea kicked around from back in 2013 or earlier. In tunnels and at the edges of overpasses, down the center separator. Glad to see someone actually putting it to use. The efficiency is still an issue for home use. Cost per kwh data is missing. A lot will ride on that.
I got another one for you. Decades ago I saw the following in Popular Mechanics magazine. They proposed putting pressure plats in the highway system before tollways. Cars had to break and slow down anyway. As cars drove up onto the plate it would depress the plate and pump hydraulic fluid through a pipe to the side of the road. The fluid would then run a generator. Basically, anywhere you have high volume traffic and autos need to slow down anyway pressure plates could be installed to assist in slowing down the cars. For example, exiting onto an off ramp from the highway.
Thereby reducing brake efficiency thus gaining more fun at the crossroads... run cameras, upload accidents and get more views. Buy energy using ad money: free energy!
The Savonius design is 100 years old. Spoiler alert: they didn't. There is also the simple math error; a 2 m high vertical axle wind turbine will never produce 24 kW (8:50) or 2.5 kW (5:31 so which is it, Dave?), but more like 25 W. omnicalculator. com /ecology /wind-turbine
@@deathhog Check out Jeffrey Lebowski's comment which calculates the real output; around 25 watt at 5.4 m/s. It's a real shame that the good, critical comments are drowned out by happy fans with no clue.
@@JustHaveaThink What do you have to say about the claims you make of 24 kW (at 8:50) or 2.5 kW (at 5:31) you make (so which is it??), that are clearly wrong for a turbine of this size? Sorry, Dave, but computer says no.
Bloody marvelous bit of creative thinking. As a road cyclist I am only too aware of the energy that comes from a body moving thru the air. I wish them every success.
The second you revealed this idea.. I went OMG.. what a genius idea... Reusing the energy already being generated. Basically Recycling Kinetic Energy. You could put this on every Freeway, roadway, side street.. etc.. and pump the power to nearby homes. Fantastic Video!
I visited Kyoto, Japan in 209. They were setting up a group of these turbines along a windy island. It sure is a lot more pleasing to the eye than the tower turbines we usually see.
@@neutrino78x Um yourself. How shall I put this politely? I've been to Kyoto. There is no coastline or islands visible from there. As I believe I mentioned in my comment, which you perhaps have read, Kyoto is inland. And yes, Japan = islands, you got that right. Big ones. Um indeed.
I use to live nextdoor to the guy who invented the vertical axis turbine. He had one on his roof that would spin with virtually no wind. A 3mph breeze was plenty to keep it moving. It was hooked to an old tractor pto that ran a 1" shaft with a square lug on the end (same as fits a 1" socket receiver). At 3mph, two full grown men couldn't even slow it down by grabbing the shaft. He liked to watch us shower through a window though...we didn't talk much.
Actually here in South Africa those little turbines are very common. They are used in combination with solar on major roads to power cameras, communications and other devices.
Wonderful concept. Not only for Highways. Imagine the power available from movement of railway trains, particularly subway systems where an air pressure wave is pushed along in tunnels.
I thought of this about 30 years ago while talking with my brother who owned one of the first solar companies in our state. It just made so much sense, and we thought that local and state governments could lease the medians where these would go and make money as well. I wondered if it would ever be done, but now is finally the time.
Same here.. in Belgium they used to have these orange bag type wind indicators on the side of the motorway/highway (I think these where meant for truck drivers), as a kid in the back of the car I would often think, well that's part of our waist energy.. if we collect that, we'd significantly lower our own "pollution" (a 9yo's word for carbon footprint 😅)
I've had this VERY idea for many years now.. In addition, I believe overpasses could be constructed (or retrofitted) with turbines underneath to capture the same wind energy being generated..
I'm kind of glad they haven't, that would require some kind of contract, or cause censorship in topics the oil companies don't want because they payed a broadcasting company to prevent certain topics. Even if PBS doesn't have that problem, the risk isn't worth the reward.
Even if they did it wouldnt make sense to sign a contract with them. He is most likely making as much money doing this on his own that a TV station would be willing to pay for. This type of content is the future.
Thank you for producing such great, informative content and especially for presenting it in a way so positive it makes me believe in a better future. It really helps me to find a somewhat healthy balance considering all the bad news and harsh realities we are confronted with on a daily basis
I’ve often thought about these next to railway lines. It’s a more controlled environment and there are miles of high speed routes where these can be removed from view.
@@diceman199 ...then you've not considered the amount of trains in the Schiphol tunnel in the Netherlands or many underground systems around the world where there is a train every 3 minutes!
Futurists have been talking about this very idea for at least the past 15 years. It's really nice to see someone developing the idea. If we lined each side of our U.S. expressways with them, it would genera a VERY significant amount of electricity.
Actually no. For the same reason I gave in my earlier comment. The back pressure created by the wind turbines would need further energy to overcome by the train. Because the train experience an artificial head wind. (Newton's law of motion)
I would think subways more than trains just based on frequency. Cross-country freighters wouldn't pass by the turbines frequently enough to generate stable electricity generation. You could deploy the turbines still to act in twofold functions though, one to collect displaced air currents by trains and another to collect natural wind currents. Subways in more urban environments would offer better frequencies, but I still wonder if that would be enough to provide good generation. There are more structures in urban areas that cut wind patterns and so any natural wind current collection would be lower, in general, than in rural settings. Of course, there may be specific peculiarities where some VAWTS installed next to subway lines would generate crazy amounts of electricity. Depends on the specific context of the area. Roadways are good because they offer quasi-continuous flow. But then this is the whole conundrum with intermittent renewables. Grids around the world are reconfiguring to accept these kinds of sources, no matter where the intermittent electricity comes from. Then you have to think about transmission infrastructure. Trains in more urban settings use the track as the return branch of the circuit, but I'm not sure if they are rated to carry this increased load. If not, that means new infrastructure such as underground ductbank or overhead pole lines. In rural settings, most trains run parallel to roads and in theory you could tap into the pole lines that run alongside them, but the capacity constraint still comes up. It just depends on if the electricity converted in these unorthodox settings warrants the resources used to create the devices. Edit: grammar
@@j.j.1064 Well, yes and no. The Piston Effect wouldn't be as pronounced as when traveling through tunnels because: 1) the turbines would only be installed on the sides of the track (not in a semicircle around the vehicles like a tunnel), and 2) the turbines would be installed discretely as opposed to continuously (again, not like a continuous tunnel). You'd have to test and measure
I think the concept is brilliant, imagine attached to light poles with inbuilt power gathering source. Near trains, airports the possibilities are endless
There is quite a lot of room between runways and taxiways to put these in. Airports tend to be windier just because they are open and don't have many things blocking wind.
..I’ve been asking this question since I was 8yrs old... I first thought these should be standard on airports / airfields... massive amounts of energy not being harnessed🎯💯
@@troyb3659 .. actually I did / have been.. grew up around DFW.. rode the tram every weekend watching planes.. especially Concorde.. so much wasted energy around airports
This inspired me to look at my energy usage since Oct 2021. Living alone in a 1 bed flat, my energy use Oct to the end of Jan was an average of 6.5 kwh per day. With a small unit charging a 10-12 kwh battery pack I could probably be OK. Would like to try it.
I have a better product, where you harvest the energy of people brushing their teeth. It does not work, but neither does this, and mine is cheaper by far. So it's a no-brainer what you should choose.
Your backward governor won’t allow it. You would be stealing money from the ultra-rich, elitist, republican oil executives who rake in billions of dollars while the middle class gets screwed! We can’t have that in the great Lone Star State.
@@dr.OgataSerizawa Is there such a regulation that prevents people from installing such units? If yes please do share else everything you say is just speculation and I don't quite understand why you would say this. From what I understand these things are not very uncommon, I see them on rooftops on loads on commercial buildings, its not much of a stretch of imagination to say that this is probably legal in Texas too. But in case it is illegal I would surely like to read up more on why and who made these things illegal.
Chicago too - the density of the skyscrapers there means that the wind whistles through the gaps inbetween, which is one reason why they call it the Windy City.
Absolutely. Sunshine all day and windy all night. I can vouch for the traffic generated wind too. As a cyclist along Mts Bay Road from uni to the city, it is always a headwind when travelling east even when there is a seabreeze. That must be the traffic effect and it is not insignificant.
Perth is an excellent example of what could be done with this type of generation. Not only is there the multi lane freeways covering a large distance of coast but also there is a light rail system operating in the middle of the motorway lanes. I recall seeing similar in Chicago en route from airport to city. I can foresee that power could be generate from both sources of movement. The added beauty of Perth is the wonderful amount of sunshine it receives.
Grade school kids have been wondering about why you can't put wind turbines on cars and recoup some energy for decades, in hind sight it's astounding no one thought of put the turbines on the side of the road sooner. This seems amazing and utterly worthwhile, I can't wait to see it on the side of the road
@@Withnail1969 watch the video on which we are commenting? btw I advocate nuclear for central power plants. We should also have solar on every roof and wind in every backyard though. :)
@@neutrino78x impossible, if we tried to replace the energy used in vehicles from fossil fuels with nuclear power, we would need 10,000 new nuclear power stations world wide and uranium resources would be exhausted within 20 years.
Thanks for sharing the cool video. This is a GREAT idea; I really hope that it works out as well in practice as they think it will! This could also solve another issue that we're facing here in the US: taxes on gasoline are used to maintain our roads. As more vehicles shift to electric, our wear and tear on the road remains constant but our maintenance budget shrinks. If those same roads could harvest energy from passing cars, that could be sold back to the grid in order to help cover road maintenance costs!
Living in the crazy windy, traffic damned city of Cape Town , with rolling blackouts constantly looming I had this same idea for street lamps last year!! Awesome to see someone actually built a working version! Perhaps I should actually pursue figuring out a diy version and see if there is any real local interest
@@jmus6494 Well, we don't seem to have a big issue with people stealing lampposts, or solar panels off of signs. History seems to lean in the direction of: thieves are lazy.
@@Kineth1 hate to be cynical. There is a huge problem stealing manhole covers, cell tower batteries, water meters ( if metal). All depends if there is any value to be gained
@@jmus6494 No worries about the cynicism. They said these would be made mostly of composite materials, and weigh in under 10 kilos. Composites don't have much (if any) scrap value, and it looks like the amount of copper is going to be very little as well, so if anybody were going to go to the effort to steal something like this, it would have to be sold off as a whole unit, or as parts for this unit in particular, which makes the theft easily traceable to the the sale. That isn't a good deal for the thief or the "scrap dealer". But cell tower batteries? Break them down into individual cells and they can go straight to ebay. I can definitely see the value in stealing those.
Would love to see this technology become available on a residential-sized scale. After that? Perhaps small, portable units that could be used by campers, caravaners and van-lifers to boost their off-grid capabilities when in favorable locales like the U.S. West. Something small and light enough to be popped on the roof while camped, and easily broken down for travel.
I have your answers. I can build any turbine of any size. Take a look at this. This was a prototype. Next step is 3 times bigger. studio.ruclips.net/user/videoddN5awFx254/edit I know it is not like the new turbines with blades. The reason that the savonius works so awesome, it will reach a maximum and not exceed it. Now, if we are taking energy out of it, then we can make auto transmissions that will increase the gear ratio to the electric side and increase energy output all while staying within a sort of natural norm. I am actually designing a giant turbine. Thank you and have a nice day. Don Watkins III
Sometimes a video comes along that poses an idea so obvious that it makes me feel dumb for not having thought of it myself. This is one of those! Man, what a cool tech! I really hope this takes off. There are so many millions of miles that this could be applied to!
Great insight into an honestly obscured method of energy generation. While large solar, wind, and nuclear installations are the key areas of investment and development that ought be prioritized, these types of technologies are crucial in making our energy sector more resilient. The decentralization of power generation, while it comes with its own hurdles, allows for a more versatile and reliant power grid.
You could have also looked at flower turbines. It's a Dutch company that makes quite esthetically pleasing small scale vertical wind turbines. Those can also be placed next to each other in a certain pattern to make them more efficient.
Bad product. Low energy returns and the 'tulip' wind turbine does cast shades on the leaves (blades), which make them inefficient too. Vertical wind turbines are just not very efficient, I highly doubt this video, where other vids from this channel are great.
@@tthecreator743 shade from the windmill ('flower') on the solar panels ('leaves') below (see the 'tulip' design and you see what i mean). The solar panels will work badly because of the shade from the mill.
I was just thinking… a neighbour has a vent for his loft space. It has a rotating ball shaped vane that turns when the wind is blowing. Replace this with a larger version to generate even more off the roof. What a great complement to Solar PV. I don’t think the birds would complain. When can I have one? Excellent video.
@@mostlymessingabout which gives a great location for banks of them - right within the ducts themselves and what bypasses the turbines would cool them nicely.
@@spvillano since it's a duct. It would be easier to just use a normal axial turbine. However, dust is a big issue. You wouldn't want to send a chimney boy up there to clean it every month... there is already very limited time window for any track maintenance
I have seen a lot of big city streets that have become wind tunnels because of the size and orientation of the buildings. Also the summer heated air raising from the streets might power a system like this.
City heating is actually a massive problem in its own right these days, both because it leads to extra heat stroke issues when people are outdoors but also because people indoors tend to use immense amounts of power on fans and AC. There is a lot of effort right now being put towards building cities in ways that reduce the buildup of heat. Lots of ideas from (older) cities in the Middle East, north Africa, India, etc where they've had to no choice but to deal with city heat through smart architecture for centuries prior to the invention of AC. Of course having good designs is one thing. Finding the hundreds of trillions of dollars to retrofitting (or rebuild) office towers around the world is quite a different problem, and one that applies to any effort of addressing the city heat problem. Finding options that can be bolted onto existing infrastructure (and not be a horrific eye-sore since poor aesthetics alone is enough to deter people no matter the benefits) is a heck of a challenge.
@@altrag You do know that you point out that cities are a heat trap . So those that claim the planet is getting warmer because of CO2 may be basing their argument on Temperature reading in growing cities and the increased heat they make from roads buildings , car trucks , Air conditioning etc . There is some food for thought .
@@grahamoldfield3474 Wow. Neat idea. But it turns out scientists aren't that stupid, and they take measurements all over the planet, including the middle of the ocean and the arctic and wherever else that most definitely is not subject to city heating.
@@altrag Maybe you want to have a look at what the Australia department says repeatedly and releases PR claiming hottest day etc etc to the Media . They have been shown to have been deceitful or outright lied about hottest days , highest rainfall , actually deleted historical records etc . They have tried to argue that city developed ares with roads and carpark etc cannot increase temperature . Yet on other occasions they say it does , you cannot have it both ways and be truthful .
If they're currently working on that, I'd love to see if they can actually come close these numbers in the field. Maybe you can keep an eye on it for the future?
There is no way they can; their calculation (3MW produced by 125 turbines) is wrong by three orders of magnitude. Check out @Jeffrey Lebowski's comment and calculation.
@@JustHaveaThink Thank you and for your usually great content. For this video though, there were some serious doubts expressed regarding the numbers you mentioned in the video. Maybe you could address that since they were an order of magnitude off. Did these number come from the companies website or did you do those calculations on your own?
you are a wonderful person dave, an absolute joy to listen to, i could easily sit here and listen to you waffle on for hours about all sorts of awesome stuff, your joyful character, pleasant demeanor and unbiased outlook on the subjects you present certainly make me .....JUST HAVE A THINK.....
The cell tower placement for these vertical axis turbines makes excellent sense, both for robust service and for lessening grid demand. Thank you Dave for the wonderful presentation! 🎁🌞🌄🌀
Looking at the turbines and considering the location of a nearby commercial property, that's a couple of hundred meters on two property borders that are right of way for two superhighways at right angles to each other. Add in, the property itself occupies the top of a rather large hill, there's also quite a bit of ambient wind on top of what could be harvested from the edge of the right of way. I'll have to sit down tomorrow and crunch the numbers, but I suspect that the business' electric bill could drop into the negatives frequently enough and be offset to below petty cash prices mostof the time.
I want to thank you for posting this video. For more than 4 years, I have been thinking about how nice it would be to harvest the wind generated by vehicles driving on highways. I had proposed that my son, then in 8th grade, put together a science project looking at vibration type wind generators (e.g. like blades of grass), but his teacher shot down the idea as infeasible. Your video brings many ideas to the front line of future alternative energy solutions and I applauded your efforts. I also applaud your quick correction, as many folks don’t like recognizing when a mistake has been made. Very nicely done. If I had any engineering skills, I would be working hard to improve alternative energy systems as I believe our future and the future of our planet depend on it. Thank you!
Hi Oswald. Thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated. You might like to check out this latest video from a RUclips colleague. ruclips.net/video/iWGfB4najfM/видео.html It actually features precisely the type of bladeless wind 'turbine' that you described in your message
Thx. I spent the last hour getting acquainted with Rosie, at your suggestion. She is brilliant. I will look at the additional link soon. All the best, O
Love this video and another step could be a more portable model installed on balconies across the worlds apartment complexes if you can create a smaller compact plugin version that feeds energy back in to the network.
I’d love to see the fins of those highway turbines built of bamboo. Perhaps each fin could be made from a section of bamboo steamed into the correct curvature - green, renewable, biodegradable yet capable of withstanding years of weather, cheap, and lightweight.
Bamboo yes, but even better built from recycled plastics, which will last a lifetime. There is another British company that is building solar panels from virtually 100% recycled materials.
Who hasn't over the years thought of things like this?There's a section of motorway near us which has a dual carriageway underneath.The movement of that section I have thought should with some clever bods working at it click on a generator of sorts to provide energy! Although it is above my head your output is very encouraging and a welcome treat.Thank you.
I've been interested in these for a while, i think they would reduce noise and probably look better too. Many busy freeways have walls now which probably cost more than some vawt.
This is an absolutely inspiring video. I hadn't even considered harvesting energy generated by traffic. Lots of chatter about the vertical turbines... going way back to the Cousteau Society Ship with vertical turbines instead of sail. Thank you so much, you have a new subscriber! I'm glad to have happened upon this video!
For backup on sunny days, a parabolic mirrored disk focused on a closed-loop 'steam-turbine' generator could also produce power for the lamps with surplus returned to the grid... would add new shapes to the 'skyline' too.
I got another one for you. Decades ago I saw the following in Popular Mechanics magazine: They proposed putting pressure plats in the highway system before tollways. Cars had to (break and) slow down anyway. As cars drove up onto the plate and depressing it pumped hydraulic fluid through a pipe to the side of the road to run a generator.
Do some research on vawts. They don't make much power at all. Anytime they're spinning some of the blades are pushing into the wind. They're a novelty. If you are designing a bunch of highway lighting and adding these spinners to them doesn't break the bank I'd be for it but all the previous work and sales of vawts has shown they put out a small fraction of a similarly sized hawt. It's the physics of lift versus push. vawts are just much less efficient at capturing the energy in the wind.
Its a terrible idea - given their number for windspeed of 5.4m/s and a blade size of 2x0.5m the air only has 100 watts of power (kinetic energy passing through the blade area per second). So even if they were really efficient like 35% they would only generate 35 watts each... Nowhere near 2.5kw or 24kw as they claim in the video. Dont believe me? Search powerequation for windpower and plug in all of the numbers your self - its not complicated just kinetic energy...
How do you fit a wind turbine on a pole that has one end in a motorway and the other end has a big light on top ? It must be genius as I can see no way of doing it, can you ?
@@goldmagnet9013 I had the same question... most likely the pole has to be cut, or at least removed, and then 'retrofitted' - or -longshot- a clamshell design, which seems nearly impossible for the alignment of the moving parts, bearings, etc. Perhaps our professor will make a follow up video on how these are installed.
@@rickdworsky6457A follow up video would be great. I had a look at their prototypes and they are very primitive. This really is an idea not a product, and the figures that are quoted would need a new type of physics to be discovered.
Something I didn't catch you mention, is the likely fact that the overall gas consumption will increase on the road. Putting obstacles alongside the road is to me pretty obvious makes the "air friction" increase.
Making each turbine blade flexible would allow it to present a greater surface area going downwind and therefore possibly increase its performance. On the upwind leg it would retract slightly to reduce air resistance. A hinged blade with limited movement would work in a similar manner but be more complex to manufacture.
As awesome as this would be if it works there is one thing that keeps coming to mind. These turbines use the air off of vehicles to turn. That means that very likely having a bunch of them on roadways may cause significant turbulence and air resistance, disrupting vehicles ability to push air out of the way. Allowing you to still harvest the energy sure, but potentially drastically reducing vehicles fuel efficiencies in thos areas and possibly making the energy waste problem even worse. It would be nice to see if they have tested this yet, and what their findings have been.
Court Defendant: Yes I was exceeding the posted speed limit by around 100mph. But considering how much energy I was generating, you should be paying me.
@@2002RM well that would be interesting to calculate, how many more accidents would we willing to accept. Then again if everyone went certain speed then that should be the actual speed limit.
@@viljosavolainen2286 I see an opportunity there, an increased number of deaths due to accidents, would lower the energy consumption of the society, and we could also harvest more energy if we use the corpses for biomass. Just have a think!
@@TheAlchaemist i dont believe that death rate vould increase that much compared to more energy needed for increased speed. Atleast some of the accidents wont be fatal so partisipants will also require new vehicles. The energy gained from this system is brobably quite miniscule albeit possibly still cost effective way to get some energy back.
No energy production to speak of either. The reason there are no bird deaths is there are virtually no installations, 100 years after Savonius invented them.
This for once sounds like a goldmine, unlike many other ideas. They can be basically installed on every pole around the world, even on the poles of solar panels or normal wind turbines ^.^
@@4saken404 ... it can also be installed on poles without wiring... Then it will cost slightly more, but at least you still have not install an extra pole.
On solar panels they throw a shadow. On wind turbines the wind turbine already takes a lot of the wind, behind the blades there is a lot of turbulence and little energy.
This is fabulous... imagine every house, every pole down a major motorway... it would be a massive influx of power. So much easier than putting a solar array on your roof, and so much easier to replace your roof vs having a ton of solar panels you have to remove first. Great channel, subscribed !
I had not thought about augmenting solar with wind at my house until now, but one thing climate change has brought to southeastern Michigan is lots of wind!
Here in Valencia there is a plan to install these turbines in a tower in the marina entrance to supply all the power needed by the marina itself. It is planned as a prooving ground for the system developed by the university here but is a fine example of what you have detailed in this video.
@Ember Rhapsody Certainly agree with your comment, problem is there are not enough people with the will to do that. In light of the lack of science knowlege in the community today, it would be impossible to get complience.
Question: wouldn't the vehicles need to push harder, and use more fuel, because of these turbines? Yes there is always wasted airflow beside the traffic, but would the vehicles need to spend more energy than the wind turbine will extract? If that is not the case, which I hope is true, this is a fantastic idea! Thank you for the amazing content!
Absolutely they would. This is basically the same idea as putting a wind turbine *on* your car to harvest energy from your driving speed and the wind that results. Any energy the wind has came from the car, in this case.
That's my concern. Would the air displaced by vehicles meet more resistance with these installed? Perhaps a better option would be to install them at the top of the lamposts to pick up any wind that's blowing about, well out of the way of the traffic.
@@GerryRR About putting a wind turbine on your car being a bad idea, it actually can have a net positive effect and generate valuable electricity! This is because the wind turbine has less drag compared to the front of our vehicles. I came across a channel named "Quint builds" that tested the idea recently, here's the video if you want to check it out yourself. ruclips.net/video/tEPBdztGMdI/видео.html Not sure if we can translate this experiment to lamp post turbines tho. The latter probably does not reduce drag on the vehicle. Though if we can tap into all the untilised wind energy for a little more fuel consumption, that might actually give positive results? Thanks!
@@vishank7 I mean, if what you were saying was true then you could build an electric car that powers itself. Nobody has done this, so I'm going to take a RUclipsrs experiments with a grain of salt.
@@GerryRR It does not generate enough electricity to power the entire vehicle. I was skeptical about the idea at first as well, though that guy is a credible science communicator and knows what he is doing. He uses more math than words to prove his point, do check the video out!
I've set up the electrical services for Cell Towers (I work for a power utility company) and they use a LOT of power. While I agree that putting one of these on a tower would be a good idea, I don't think it would be able to provide all the power needed... That being said, that shouldn't be a deterrent from putting one on anyways. The only issue is the stress one of these would put on a tower. If you guyed it in all directions, then it'd be fine, but these towers are very tall and the guys would need to extend out pretty far. It would most likely be cost-prohibitive for the comms companies to lease the extra land just for the turbine.
I worked in Telecoms and you’re correct -retrofitting horizontal or vertical wind turbines to an existing structure can be very expensive. Then there’s the cost of maintenance by a specialised work force. Solar wins out on whole of life costs.
@@bobbyp21 I think you might be misunderstanding something... People (Companies) aren't going to do something that will lose them money. We have so many fantastic technologies that don't get used because they're not cost-effective. So, while Einstein was correct in his quote about creating new things or renovating old things, when it comes to implementing them, he is not. After all, having a ring of solar panels in orbit around the sun while beaming all that delicious solar energy back to earth via microwaves is a very creative idea. It would solve the world's energy problems immediately... Extremely creative... but until technology catches up to the point where it's cost-effective, it will never be done. There are two sources of humanity's greatest innovation... one is War, unfortunately, and the other is when someone figures out a way to make an expensive process cheaper. I love the idea of putting these vertical turbines along a roadway. America should implement this immediately. I believe it would be cost-effective and it would make use of something we only thought of as waste... wind created by passing cars.
Yes strange, and Robert Murry Smith never produces proper figures for any of his windmill designs either. This is not about making wind turbines, its about selling shares in the company before they are found out.
@@goldmagnet9013 Exactly, it is not like he couldn't do it, but I guess the numbers were so disappointing to him that he just skipped the embarrassment.
@@tzenophile Yes Murray Smiths channel is just rubbish, he shows his "members" how to build stuff that does not perform, and will not last. Hes build 6 of 7 turbines now, all utterly useless, and he never publishes standard values of their outputs. Its just about making videos, that's it. Now this channel - the guys got a degree, surely he can spend 15 minutes doing a little maths before making a nice video on something that does not stack up, very disappointing.
@@goldmagnet9013 There should be a youtube parallel to Beall’s list of predatory/fake academic journals, where we could document false claims of the dubious tubers...
@@tzenophile I dont have the time to do that, but it might be handy. I like this channels presenting style, I have looked at 2 videos this one and the turbulent turbine. Both are mathematically flawed and a short time spent researching would have made a huge difference, unless the channel is being paid to promote these products ?
****************** INFORMATION CORRECTION FROM THE VIDEO CREATOR********************
Some of you eagled-eyed viewers have pointed out a discrepancy in the arithmetic in a cost comparison between a solar farm and an installation of turbines, which was originally featured at the halfway point in this video. Having spoken directly with the folks at Alpha 311 we have established that, while the bottom-line cost comparisons were correct, there was a syntax error in the original presentation document from which the comparison was taken, and there was some key data that I had not included in my commentary which would have clarified how the calculations had been made. It’s not possible to add a new section to a video once it has been posted on RUclips, but it is possible to delete certain sections, so I have now removed the comparison slide, and it no longer features in the video. I am however conscious that some of you would like to understand what the accurate numbers really are. So here they are :
Cost comparison :
A 3MW solar farm on 15 acres of land, consisting of 12,000 panels at 250W per panel, with a 25 year ‘Power Purchase Agreement’ at an agreed cost of between 4.7pence and 6.3pence per kWh, giving an overall 25 year cost range of between £38.2m and £51.3m
Versus
An installation of 125 turbines along an existing 4.5km stretch of motorway with a monthly lease cost (including installation and lifetime maintenance) of £29,000, giving a full 25-year cost of £8.7m.
Calculations:
A 3MW Solar installation receiving 6 hours of useable sunlight each day (averaged across a year) works out like this:
3000kW x 6hrs = 18,000kWh per day
In the original document the turbine installation was also quoted as having a 3MW generating capacity. This was INCORRECT.
I also omitted an important power generation graph that was included in the company’s original presentation to me. That graph came from the external test house and it showed that the turbines have a maximum rotational speed of 420RPM in a wind speed of 19m/s, giving a maximum generating capacity of 6kW, (which by the way, is well within the capacity of the turbine’s alternator, which is rated at 13kW)
125 turbines at 6kW per turbine = 750kW total capacity (NOT 3MW as originally stated)
Wind Turbine maximum capacities are based on an assumption of constant wind speed over 24 hours (just like solar panel maximum capacities are based on the assumption that it will always be sunny during operating hours).
The sums for the turbine installation therefore work out like this :
750kW for 24 hrs = 18,000kWh per day
So, although the generating capacity of the turbines is less than the solar farm, the rated available operating time is 4 times greater. That means that the overall generating capacities for the 2 installations are indeed comparable.
Alpha 311 have conducted extensive testing on their turbines with external test houses over a three-year period prior to investing heavily in tooling to set up production on multi-million-dollar contracts with large corporations who, you can be assured, will have done their own due diligence on their investments before signing on the dotted line. The folks at Alpha 311 assure me that they have seen the operational performance of their turbines with their own eyes, and they stand by their numbers 100%. Ultimately, unless you enjoy standing in a court room being sued for misinformation and breach of contract, it is generally sensible to ensure your product ‘does what it says on the tin’, and having now spoken at length with the Chief Executive of the company, I am satisfied that Alpha 311 are acting in good faith.
I would also like to directly address the less savoury comments from one or two very ‘animated’ commentators who felt the need to post multiple defamatory comments about me personally. For the record…I am not affiliated in any way with Alpha 311. This video was not funded, sponsored, or paid for in any way by Alpha 311. I have never, and will never, accept any payment or sponsorship from any company for any services or endorsements on any of my videos. I have never, and will never, monetise any of my videos. So, this video, just like all my videos, attracts ZERO revenue for me. There is absolutely NO incentive at all for me to intentionally post spurious information. I am however a human being, not a robot. Occasionally I make mistakes like everyone else. And when I do, I always hold my hands up and do my best to make reparations. I hope I have managed to do so in this instance., Many thanks. Dave Borlace (Just Have a Think channel operator)
Great work Dave, I must admit my first thought was that this was a variation on the 'turbine on the car roof' concept. Glad to see it's really a great idea. Ignore the pinheads, the hard of thinking will always be there.
Dear Dave, it is highly appreciated that you acknowledge and correct the error. However, 6kW out of a two meter tall VAWT turbine at 19 m/s is impossible, even if this particular company should have revolutionized VAWT design, as there simply is not that much energy available in a swept area of that size. A VAWT calculator (there are several available) will show max figures of 2.6 kW @ 19m/s. But 19 m/s is a GALE wind speed. At a 'normal' wind speed of 5.4 the power output would be a lousy 60-70 watt (see below for the calculation). Icewind.is is making a similar-sized VAWT the RW500, which is rated at 500W at 10 m/s. So 6 kW @ 19 m/s appears to be in error.
The formula for VAWT wind energy is Power=1/2*Area*Air Density*velocity^3 Assuming a turbine 2 meters tall and 1.2 m wide, at sea level air density, we get 1/2*2*1.2*1.3*19^3 = 10700W, and at 30% efficiency we get 3kW before losses, NB at a Gale wind. 5.4 m/s gives 74 watt at 30% efficiency. I'm sorry to say that I believe there is more correction to be done here, E.g. at 5:30 where you still claim 5.4 m/s yields 2500 watt per generator.
The cost of a 3mw solar farms is about 2,9m euro. Canadian solar (glas/film) Solaredge transformer with duo optimerzers. 3,1m euro if you raise them higer for sheep graizing. All prices without groundfee (2.5k/ha - 6k/ha)
Alpha 311 has a great concept, hope it works. Look beter then solar farms.
@@tzenophile well, those are the numbers from the company so if you'd like, you'd probably have to take it up with them.
Thanks for the correction, there is still a few giant problems though:
The first one should not be controversial, because we will assume that all of alpha 311's numbers are correct:
They claim that 1 turbine produces 6kwh per day, and 125 turbines will produce 750kwh per day, and that this would make their installation equivalent to a 3mw solar farm.
The "capacity factor" (the actually generated energy per year divided by the nameplate capacity working at full load for 1 year continously) for solar power in the UK is 10% (because of night time and clouds etc - it can be as high as 29% in other countries).
This means that in the UK a 3mw capacity solar farm will only generate 300kw on average throughout the year.
Per day this will still produce 300kw*24h = 7200kwh.
And 7200kwh is 9.6x more than the 750kwh being produce by the 125 turbines.
So the solar farm and the turbines are not equivalent at all in fact the solar farm would be almost 10x more productive... Even in the UK which is not great for solar.
And because the price advantage of the turbines was not better than 10:1 in their misleading calculation, it follows that solar is alot cheaper than this type of wind energy.
It doesnt make sense for alpha 311 to give the solar farm a 25% capacity factor (6 out of 24 hours per day - which is actually still too high for the UK and most places) but then give their wind turbine no or a 100% capacity factor, when they compare their turbine to solar power - Especially since they assume extremly high and RARE windspeeds of 19m/s which will give them a very high max capacity but a very small capacity factor.
When they then say a turbine will only produce 6kwh per day, theyre admitting that the turbine only has a 1/24 or 4.17% capacity factor - which is alot worse than solar and at lower installed capacity. - Such a low capacity factor makes sense for their turbine though because its high max capacity relies on such strong and rare winds.
(6kwh per day at 6kw installed max capacity = 1/24 capacity factor)
I also wanted to show that the 6kw is unrealistic even for 19m/s winds - again easy basic physics, but this comment is already very long and tzenophile already did that calculation above - He was extremly generous as well when he assumed a 2x1.3m blade size which is more than 2x larger than what can be seen in alpha 311's advertisement (alpha-311.com/ )- only one side of the turbine produces power, because the other half is moving INTO the wind... - So take the turbines width divided by 2 to get the relevant blade width.
Anyways - maybe try to fix these giant errors - a 10x mistake that lets them outperform solar with super misleading and stupid calculations is not acceptable on your great channel!!!
Love you and your channel,
Cheers.
I keep hearing this… the point that was made at the very end… people want to put down any idea for energy generation that is small and local by pointing out how it can’t possibly replace the large central energy producers we currently have. As pointed out, people need to embrace these “complementary” sources of energy. Energy in the future has to come from many sources, not just one huge monopolistic fossil fuel power source. We need to keep inventing, innovating and thinking of new ways. Use them all.
6kwh per day*356days a year = 2.136 MWh. 1MWh of electricity in the grid costs £40. Say these turbines last 15 years througout their entire life they produce a whopping £85*15 = £1275 WOW! Problem solved, we just need to install these £3k turbines, £1k electronics and £500 installation costs and in mere 53years each one will pay for itself and will start producing energy for consumers. If of course, it will survive that long.
@@makerbeelab5546 average construction cost for a natural gas power plant is $800/kw production capacity. These power plants are government subsidized in many ways, sometimes including completely waived startup costs. The lifespan of a generator is 15-20 years WITH REGULAR MAINTENANCE. Most plants have about 50 people in operation and maintenance, each paid between $40-$130k/year. That's $4.2 million a year in wages alone... now add nearly $400 million for a startup cost to power a single city for 15-20 years.
800 of these wind turbines in the upper range would cost 2.4 mil and produce 1600MWh/year, the same a coal plant produces in a day... oh... wow, youre right, we should totally go with coal, which burns 2.2 tons of coal per household every year, turning the surrounding area into a superfund site that takes over $200 billion and decades to clean up, and thats if they ever get around to it considering there are over 270 superfund sites and growing faster than we can even make the money to clean them up, and that's if, of course, WE even survive that long.
But if you think its cheaper to just push the poison on to your next of kin to clean up, who am I to argue... I dont have kids, YOUR kids can do it! I believe in their weakening bones!
If you waste a lot of money on a supposed wind energy system that returns almost zero electricity, you will just be throwing money away, and be let down when it breaks. I am in wind energy. We have a 10 kW turbine here that pays the electric bill. The installation was here when I bought the place during a recession. After it broke I got a new (used) one for pennies on the dollar. Now on my third one at this location. They weigh half a ton, not including the tower, and cost thousands of dollars and a crane just to lower it for service. Even then, it's a tough case to make versus just paying the electric bill. Best case scenario is you might break even versus paying your electric bill if you got the turbine for free and know how to maintain and repair it. Until it breaks down, then you are stuck paying thousands to remove it. That is using the only brand on the market that can even stay running. You could buy a house for the same money and rent it out, paying your electric bill many times over. Everything else in small-wind is a complete joke. Do not believe any output claims on Ebay etc. Complete junk, all lies. Too many failure modes. Made for average winds, small wind turbine self-destruct in storms.
That not the point these new type of wind or solar is supposed to be decentralized mass power plant of wind farms
@@jjrichardson5434 Centralized and huge, or small and independent, they all have to generate enough electricity to pay for themselves. Utility-scale machinery has passed the "does it even work?" test. Any whacky small turbine is just some crackpot's experiment, and they never work well, and self-destruct in the first storm.
Just set a few up in any House of Parliament there will be enough wind to provide energy for the whole country.
Goes the same for US CONGRESS LOL 😝
Hahaha, funny as hell!
Shadow Banned denial can be a cancer for which there is no cure. Do not sell your soul for promises. That only lead you to perdition.
Boris approves
I see what you did there "in" instead of "on" very funny. 😁👍🤣🤣
I love your videos. Always solid content but I especially like your soft manner of speaking, quickly moving through the facts without repeating yourself. You quickly cover all sides to the story. Pros and cons.
Thank you.
Thanks Bill. I really appreciate that feedback.
Could not agree more. Concise, to the point, calm and technically sound.
Soft speaking yes, but all sides of story really? Pros and cons? What con did he list except "it's unproven"?
All the numbers seem garbage: 1 turbine can generate 2.5 kW under typical conditions (at 5:26) but 125 of them make a 3MW power station (at 8:44)?
Furthermore, apparently this 2.5kW turbine can only generate 6kWh each day?? (at 5:48). Every month that's 180 kWh for a turbine that is rented for 232 GBP per month (at 9:20)! Check your electricity bill and tell me if 1.29 GBP per kWh is a good price...
Either there has been some mixup in the numbers or that's a scam...
@@N4w4k You're right, the real wattage for a VAWT this size is 25 w. Some of us has been making this point since just 1-2 hours after the video release, but Dave is not listening. Extremely disappointing, especially given all the viewers who actually believe this nonsense.
'Dulcet tones' is the expression we would use in our house, I totally agree wi you of a wonderfully engaging voice, if only my teacher in school talked like this, I reckon I'd of paid a lot more attention and learnt a lot more. Excellent vid.
I live in Southern California where we have lots of wind. I’ve been watching the development of these wind turbines for over 10 years and finally they are getting small enough to make it feasible to put on top of houses. If we had these along our freeway systems, imagine the energy produced!
You write, "imagine the energy produced!"
It should "imaginary energy produced".
With LA's gridlock, they'll probably work in reverse. Lol. Sorry, just had to hank your chain. Would love to see California give fossil furls the finger by mass implementation of these, solar, and other renewable energy methods. AND how to recycle and reuse the materials that they are constructed from.
On top of the car too...
Would love to know what the generations levels would be if installed on the I5 between Valencia and Irvine.
@@jerrybrickley2115 are you saying the energy potential is not there?
They use this technique in Japan to keep roadside reflectors clean. The have little rotating brushes on the reflectors that are powered by traffic wind.
We need these kinds pf simple ideas and spread them around to reduce global entropy. Wasting energy)
Great video as always. Thank you. I wonder if the same idea could be used in the London Underground given the amount of air that is pushed through the tubes at speed. Food for thought.
Think of all the sound-protection-walls near autobahns and rails... - there’s got to be a way to make use of that energy instead of just dissipating it... - how about some nano piezoelectric thingies?
Indeed, the cats eye road reflector had a rubber moulding that held rain water and washed the glass prism when you drove over it.
Indeed, John Davey. The little wind turbines would spin like crazy when trains are going by, but they'd also spin more slowly and continuously from the constant breeze that comes from the temperature difference between the tunnels and the surface.
Brilliant! Thanks for shouting out Rosie's channel as well. She makes brilliant content and has come so far over the past year!
Perhaps someone has suggested this already, but this system on the London Underground could be very efficient.
My thoughts precisely.
The wind in the tunnels as the trains push the air through. If you’ve ever been in a tube station as a train approaches, you can feel it. Line them all along the walls of the tunnel.
@@frankieking1941 And sit back and enjoy the extra turbulence and noise in the tube cars. What's another 4-5 decibels?
The tube is a semi-closed air system though, unlike motorways. Probably more engineering involved to make sure the turbines don't interfere with the train's airflow, making it less cost-effective than placing those turbines elsewhere.
The opposite may be true though, making it hyper-effective and energy efficient.
@@lawsonhelpme Agreed, except it should probably be, "EVEN less cost-effective". These things (VAWT) will never be cost-effective. How do I know? They were invented 100 years ago, and companies keep reinventing them, before going out of business. They look cute, though.
I have some decorative “wind spinners” and was surprised at how much they spin. I didn’t realize how much the air moves where I live. I would love to see these VAWTs produced for use by houses.
Might make you 5 cents worth of electricity a year dipstick
@@profribasmat217 I find it really funny when trolls mock the very power source farmers have been using for centuries to do the grunt labor of pumping water. You, sir, are the dipstick.
Nina, you're right on. If you wanted to power your yard lights and such by harnessing local gusts and storing that energy in lithium cells, much like how those little solar walkway lights work, then absolutely give it a go. Heck, if you have enough of them, you might even be able to offset your home lights. Power storage is pricey if bought new, but it can be a fun learning experience if you're willing to think outside the retail store.
Any electric motor, though some are better than others, can be used as an electric generator. My suggestion would to use an old alternator. Though since any motor will work, I suggest a broken power tool or old DVD player motor.
Yes, but connect them to a generator with an electrical load on it and you immediately need a lot of torque to spin those blades. I had a hand-cranked generator (a test box of some kind for checking insulation I guess), and open circuited, you could spin the handle with little effort, but if you put a dead short across it, it was almost impossible to spin the thing. Obviously, with ordinary loads it was easier but still took effort.
As a retired highways foreman, with many years in civil engineering, I've been an advocate of thiis esentually free electricity production since 1980.
How about starting an organisation to put it into practice?
Can we amalgamate?
The only thing that bothers me - will these affect the fuel economy of vehicles running close to them?
@@shmadmanuts if anything i would think it would help keep the slip stream more stable. But still very minimal, the poles are already there
Free? Until you see the price tag. And the replacement costs after a few years.
Due to our pandemic life is more difficult and boring, just have a think on Sundays is informative and is a shot for my mental health. Thank You
Not thought of it that way but you are so right.
Me too. Food for thought and hope for the future.
The same pandemic causes people to have more and more crazy and stupid ideas...like harvesting wind from moving vehicles...
So agree! I adore Just Have a Think.
You think it's difficult and boring now? Wait till the reset is completed. You'll own nothing,...not even the body you were born into.
I don't think I've ever seen a RUclips channel that the world desperately needs before.
I've also never seen a RUclips channel where I learn something compelling with each video.
You're clearly not looking hard enough.
you haven't learned anything. you could learn what a bad idea this is and how the alleged figures are fake from the comments though.
you haven't seen much then
@@Withnail1969 When people say "this is bad" but don't explain why, all they say is " ".
@@Xidphel There are plenty of comments explaining in detail exactly why it's bad.
I thought of this back in the nineties while sitting at a red light in the left turn lane. Large truck were going by at high speed and actually shaking my car with their turbulence. My idea was to turn soda pop cans into turbines and line them up on top of the concrete fences that edge our freeways in the US. There could be a mini-turbine every 6-12 inches.
Bigger is better when it comes to wind
@@pissoffeachother Except when farting
Try riding a motorcycle on the highway with semi-trucks blowing past you. There's some real turbulence that almost blows you off the road along with the prevailing wind that whips you around.
That's just the kind of thing I come up with. It won't work too well, but who cares, it's just beautiful ❤️
IDEA!!!!,, Having grown up in down town Boston, one of the things that always look me by surprise was the huge wind currents you would encounter just walking around the huge buildings downtown. Mounting these types of generatos on the sides of key building in a city would make sense.
can't be done, buildings are engineered for certain levels of wind stresses. you can't just add things to them that would cause more. people on this channel don't tend to think things through.
You can add the vertical types on outrigging between the buildings to offset cooling systems. Any help is of great benefit, and the vortices between the buildings would be a terrific source for tight deployments similar to what was shown on the vid.
@@solarfinder No you can't. The buildings aren't designed for those stresses.
@@Withnail1969 Then you don't attach them to the buildings. One above an intersection would,power the LED traffic lights easily. One on every light pole. New poles with stacks of them at particularly windy places.
Also, some mounted on the street level corners of buildings I doubt would compromise their integrity. Noise could be a problem for offices at lower levels though.
Another windy place is some parking garages.
@@garychandler4296 cant do that either for the same reasons.
Cheers to the RUclips algorithm for bringing this clip to my attention. Thank you for a very informative and inspiring video!
As a 'mainly former' Motorcycle rider of four decades I can certainly vouch how much power is generated by large vehicles on our roads.
But, if you use it to generate electricity, you are using fossil fuel to generate electricity. Rather using the wind of trucks, will cause as much extra gas usage as the power you generate. It's non ecological and stealing fuel from drivers.
@@zazethe6553 You missed the comment about this in the video. The energy is already being put into the air by passing vehicles whether there is a generator absorbing some of this energy or not. There is no feed back to the vehicle so energy isn't being 'stolen' from them any more than the act or punching a hole in the air that happens whatever surrounds the vehicle..
@@dacutler actually, there is a feedback loop, it's just that we cannot imagine it. By using the energy the cars have to work harder to generate wind energy, because it introduces resistance and the cars have to push harder into the air. Every kwh you retrieve from it would increase the gass burning by 1 kwh.
@@zazethe6553 Are you saying that from experience? How does the use of energy that is being created anyway, feed back into demanding more from the engine.? The turbine isn't creating a greater headwind as the car has passed before it gets to the turbine. Also, why are you saying the energy absorbed by the turbine is exactly the same as the energy you say is demanded from the car? It's an open system, and, even if you are right, it's extremely unlikely the energy absorbed is the same as produced.
@@zazethe6553 , permit me to disagree. The turbines are not attached to the vehicles, consequently, they would not increase the drag on the vehicles. Additionally, unlike dams they do not generate their power by creating a barrier, restricting matter in motion. They merely tap into that already existing flow or displacement which every moving object causes. I also mention that the air would be generated from the "slipstream" of the cars at the edge of the road, where there is no possibility that that slipstream is leading to increased efficiency by following vehicles.
This idea is GREAT! Why isn't it my idea?
Great minds think alike! I came up with the same idea in 2019 after driving up the M6 and seeing the opportunity to harvest the wasted airflow. I’m just glad that someone had the initiative to act upon their ideas, unlike myself 👍
So many houses around here are having their chimney stacks removed and tiled over flush with the roof as they move away from coal. I quite fancy the idea of chopping the chimney stack and replacing it with one or two of these.
This is actually a great idea, because if done good, it wouldn´t even disturb the aestetics of the houses, plus providing energy (maybe not much, but better than nothing for probably low cost and cheap maintenance).
@@Suthriel The noise can be a problem
Attaching any rotating turbine, vertical or horizontal axis, to a house can transmit and amplify any vibration and be very annoying.
.
@@nellfuncky305 Then it´s done bad and needs to be fixed ;)
@@Suthriel Not likely. The spinning blade or blades creates a harmonic that is transmitted through the structure of the building and cannot not only be annoying but can also eventually cause structural issues. Better to put it on it's own self supported pole.
Put them beside airport runways so turbine thrust would spin them. Corners where planes turn to take off could give them a real spin.
Even without planes, the amount of wind that airports will experience will be very high anyway. So definitely a very good place to install them regardless.
Brilliant!
I was just about to suggest the same thing. 👍🏻
it looks like the maximum speed the turbines can safely spin at is about 40 miles per hour.
You'd want to be very careful in placement if you put them near the airplane spin up area so that the backdraft from the planes didn't exceed the rotational velocity of 40mph or you'd just burn out the breaks faster (wasting energy) or destroy the turbines.
But yeah, putting them in and around airports for traffic flow and on some of the posts inside the airport runway areas would generate a ton of electricity.
@@shauntay0248 railroads too
I have watched this channel on and off for a while now. The presentation is always educational and well put across. I found this episode to be very interesting and these turbines appear to show great promise. Thank you for producing such a great channel.
Are you kidding, this is Nuts.
Calculate the numbers!
cars produce some wind in their direction, creating a tail wind, now if you almost stop that wind, the cars are subject to higher drag.
Essentially you transfer the additional power cars must use to the dismally inefficient turbines, how stupid is this.
The net result is an increased fuel consumption, energy not recoverable.
The power required to overcome is (velocity - tailwind)³ × density × frontal area× drag coefficient
Cd ~ 0.3,
A little tail wind, car column generated reduces power enourmously!
@@arturoeugster7228 The advantage of driving behind another vehicle is that the lead vehicle reduces headwind for the car behind. This is surely not affected much by turbines on the side of the road which only harvest the spill-over wind that escapes from the roadway...?
@@petersonners4626 When there is no wind, then the only source of energy are the cars, not efficient, surely but still , the cars end up driving the turbines.
Make a test circuit indoors and all this can be measured, on reduced scale models if necessary.
Is is elementary physics.
Which is not a 'fortée' of this channel.
Even with the best possible configuration, long slender optimally twisted blades, the efficiency to extract the wind energy is never higher than 16/27, minus the skin friction of the blades and the drag of the nacelle and tower.
the condition is as follows The air tube reduces the wind speed to ⅔ windspeed, where the plane of the blades is, then in the after flow to ⅓ windspeed, This is the famous Betz optimum, accordingly the initial inflow mass has a crossectional area of ⅔ the blade area and the trailing low speed area is 3 times the small area in front. Any time the blade angles are changed the trailing velocity is above ⅓ wind speed, never ever less . vertical axis turbines fare far worse, because of the large friction losses, but who cares there is enough wind area any way, as long as there is not interference of turbines operating behind others. Even a long distance apart . But road side arrangement as shown , with no cars and modest wind do interfere.
I maintain that this is 'Nuts'.
By the way the optimum power, given by Betz, neglecting all drag sources is
P = (16/27) × density/2 × Wind³ ×
blade swept area
same as
P = (2/3 Wind)³ × density × blade swept area
same as (2/3 Wind) × Force pushing on the tower
@@arturoeugster7228 Well, it certainly sounds like you know what you're talking about - far more than me anyway, so thanks...👍
I've seen this idea kicked around from back in 2013 or earlier. In tunnels and at the edges of overpasses, down the center separator. Glad to see someone actually putting it to use. The efficiency is still an issue for home use. Cost per kwh data is missing. A lot will ride on that.
I got another one for you. Decades ago I saw the following in Popular Mechanics magazine. They proposed putting pressure plats in the highway system before tollways. Cars had to break and slow down anyway. As cars drove up onto the plate it would depress the plate and pump hydraulic fluid through a pipe to the side of the road. The fluid would then run a generator.
Basically, anywhere you have high volume traffic and autos need to slow down anyway pressure plates could be installed to assist in slowing down the cars. For example, exiting onto an off ramp from the highway.
Thereby reducing brake efficiency thus gaining more fun at the crossroads... run cameras, upload accidents and get more views. Buy energy using ad money: free energy!
Although eventually almost all cars will have the regenerative braking, thus robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Great video Dave (as usual) and thanks for the shout out 😁
Looking forward to seeing how these early turbines go in the long term!
The Savonius design is 100 years old. Spoiler alert: they didn't.
There is also the simple math error; a 2 m high vertical axle wind turbine will never produce 24 kW (8:50) or 2.5 kW (5:31 so which is it, Dave?), but more like 25 W. omnicalculator. com /ecology /wind-turbine
Yeah, I pressed one hell of an X to Doubt when it was kilowatts. I could see maaaaybe a kilowatt.
@@deathhog Check out Jeffrey Lebowski's comment which calculates the real output; around 25 watt at 5.4 m/s. It's a real shame that the good, critical comments are drowned out by happy fans with no clue.
Cheers Rosie. And thanks for the knowledge I gained from watching your very informative videos :-)
@@JustHaveaThink What do you have to say about the claims you make of 24 kW (at 8:50) or 2.5 kW (at 5:31) you make (so which is it??), that are clearly wrong for a turbine of this size? Sorry, Dave, but computer says no.
Bloody marvelous bit of creative thinking. As a road cyclist I am only too aware of the energy that comes from a body moving thru the air. I wish them every success.
The second you revealed this idea.. I went OMG.. what a genius idea... Reusing the energy already being generated. Basically Recycling Kinetic Energy. You could put this on every Freeway, roadway, side street.. etc.. and pump the power to nearby homes. Fantastic Video!
Yeah, grab the money and run next time someone pays for something. It's called recycling!
I need these for my manufactured home community. We have 55 homes and would be incredible to see it completely wind powered.
you're dreaming , why do you guys see something and you're totally sold its the answer to everything without ever even seein one in operation
I visited Kyoto, Japan in 209. They were setting up a group of these turbines along a windy island. It sure is a lot more pleasing to the eye than the tower turbines we usually see.
Did you notice any noise pollution?
A windy island in the city of Kyoto? Kyoto is inland.
Wow! To think Jesus died just 175 prior to your visit is amazing.
@@tzenophile um, he obviously meant an island visible from Kyoto. and btw the whole nation of Japan is a set of islands.
@@neutrino78x Um yourself. How shall I put this politely? I've been to Kyoto. There is no coastline or islands visible from there. As I believe I mentioned in my comment, which you perhaps have read, Kyoto is inland. And yes, Japan = islands, you got that right. Big ones. Um indeed.
I use to live nextdoor to the guy who invented the vertical axis turbine. He had one on his roof that would spin with virtually no wind. A 3mph breeze was plenty to keep it moving. It was hooked to an old tractor pto that ran a 1" shaft with a square lug on the end (same as fits a 1" socket receiver). At 3mph, two full grown men couldn't even slow it down by grabbing the shaft. He liked to watch us shower through a window though...we didn't talk much.
Georges Jean Marie Darrieus?
Actually here in South Africa those little turbines are very common. They are used in combination with solar on major roads to power cameras, communications and other devices.
Can send a photo or tell us what are they called (commercially)?
In Japan there are traffic wind-powered rotating brushes that keep small road safety reflectors free of mud and dust.
Seems to me yet another brilliant idea and especially useful for home installation as it’s less of an eyesore.
Wonderful concept. Not only for Highways. Imagine the power available from movement of railway trains, particularly subway systems where an air pressure wave is pushed along in tunnels.
I thought of this about 30 years ago while talking with my brother who owned one of the first solar companies in our state. It just made so much sense, and we thought that local and state governments could lease the medians where these would go and make money as well. I wondered if it would ever be done, but now is finally the time.
Same here.. in Belgium they used to have these orange bag type wind indicators on the side of the motorway/highway (I think these where meant for truck drivers), as a kid in the back of the car I would often think, well that's part of our waist energy.. if we collect that, we'd significantly lower our own "pollution" (a 9yo's word for carbon footprint 😅)
I've had this VERY idea for many years now.. In addition, I believe overpasses could be constructed (or retrofitted) with turbines underneath to capture the same wind energy being generated..
Your production is equal to professional TV networks. I'm surprised PBS or a major Cable Network hasn't approached you!!
I'm kind of glad they haven't, that would require some kind of contract, or cause censorship in topics the oil companies don't want because they payed a broadcasting company to prevent certain topics.
Even if PBS doesn't have that problem, the risk isn't worth the reward.
We just need more people doing good things. Do your part and learn to,,,,,,,, anything good
Even if they did it wouldnt make sense to sign a contract with them. He is most likely making as much money doing this on his own that a TV station would be willing to pay for. This type of content is the future.
Better, I will say!
That's the last thing he needs!
Thank you for producing such great, informative content and especially for presenting it in a way so positive it makes me believe in a better future. It really helps me to find a somewhat healthy balance considering all the bad news and harsh realities we are confronted with on a daily basis
I’ve often thought about these next to railway lines. It’s a more controlled environment and there are miles of high speed routes where these can be removed from view.
The only thing with that is there are not enough trains continually passing to generate a constant airflow.
@@diceman199 how about naturally occurring wind? Are there railway tracks that are to some degree exposed to "the elements"?
@@tiltil9442 That may well be possible. I was only commenting regarding the wind from the trains
@@diceman199 ...then you've not considered the amount of trains in the Schiphol tunnel in the Netherlands or many underground systems around the world where there is a train every 3 minutes!
@@61PietPiraat of course there will be a few places like those but they are the exception
Futurists have been talking about this very idea for at least the past 15 years. It's really nice to see someone developing the idea. If we lined each side of our U.S. expressways with them, it would genera a VERY significant amount of electricity.
It seems like trains and subways would be good candidates for these as well.
Actually no. For the same reason I gave in my earlier comment. The back pressure created by the wind turbines would need further energy to overcome by the train. Because the train experience an artificial head wind. (Newton's law of motion)
yes millions of dollars spent so a few trains can spin them for about 1hr a day....worthless.
I would think subways more than trains just based on frequency.
Cross-country freighters wouldn't pass by the turbines frequently enough to generate stable electricity generation. You could deploy the turbines still to act in twofold functions though, one to collect displaced air currents by trains and another to collect natural wind currents.
Subways in more urban environments would offer better frequencies, but I still wonder if that would be enough to provide good generation. There are more structures in urban areas that cut wind patterns and so any natural wind current collection would be lower, in general, than in rural settings.
Of course, there may be specific peculiarities where some VAWTS installed next to subway lines would generate crazy amounts of electricity. Depends on the specific context of the area.
Roadways are good because they offer quasi-continuous flow.
But then this is the whole conundrum with intermittent renewables. Grids around the world are reconfiguring to accept these kinds of sources, no matter where the intermittent electricity comes from.
Then you have to think about transmission infrastructure. Trains in more urban settings use the track as the return branch of the circuit, but I'm not sure if they are rated to carry this increased load. If not, that means new infrastructure such as underground ductbank or overhead pole lines. In rural settings, most trains run parallel to roads and in theory you could tap into the pole lines that run alongside them, but the capacity constraint still comes up.
It just depends on if the electricity converted in these unorthodox settings warrants the resources used to create the devices.
Edit: grammar
@@j.j.1064 Well, yes and no. The Piston Effect wouldn't be as pronounced as when traveling through tunnels because:
1) the turbines would only be installed on the sides of the track (not in a semicircle around the vehicles like a tunnel), and
2) the turbines would be installed discretely as opposed to continuously (again, not like a continuous tunnel).
You'd have to test and measure
I think the concept is brilliant, imagine attached to light poles with inbuilt power gathering source. Near trains, airports the possibilities are endless
There is quite a lot of room between runways and taxiways to put these in. Airports tend to be windier just because they are open and don't have many things blocking wind.
If u run the turbine calculated on size it can't power an iphone
..I’ve been asking this question since I was 8yrs old... I first thought these should be standard on airports / airfields... massive amounts of energy not being harnessed🎯💯
This question was in my mind too but I always wondered myself. But never asked anyone.
no you havnt!!
@@troyb3659 .. actually I did / have been.. grew up around DFW.. rode the tram every weekend watching planes.. especially Concorde.. so much wasted energy around airports
This inspired me to look at my energy usage since Oct 2021. Living alone in a 1 bed flat, my energy use Oct to the end of Jan was an average of 6.5 kwh per day. With a small unit charging a 10-12 kwh battery pack I could probably be OK. Would like to try it.
I have a better product, where you harvest the energy of people brushing their teeth. It does not work, but neither does this, and mine is cheaper by far. So it's a no-brainer what you should choose.
I live in Texas and it is windy all the time, I need a couple of these on my home.
Your backward governor won’t allow it. You would be stealing money from the ultra-rich, elitist, republican oil executives who rake in billions of dollars while the middle class gets screwed! We can’t have that in the great Lone Star State.
@@dr.OgataSerizawa Is there such a regulation that prevents people from installing such units? If yes please do share else everything you say is just speculation and I don't quite understand why you would say this. From what I understand these things are not very uncommon, I see them on rooftops on loads on commercial buildings, its not much of a stretch of imagination to say that this is probably legal in Texas too. But in case it is illegal I would surely like to read up more on why and who made these things illegal.
You can buy turbines like this, they aren't very good though. The only ones that really work well are the big ones with big vanes.
You should check out the following vendor. They are based in Texas.
EZGRO TRI-HELIX SOLAR WINDMILL
They would be popular in Perth Western Australia, known as the Windy City.
And Wellington nz up transmission gully . V windy! Ani Angela messenger AROHA NUI Endsoftheearth nz
Chicago too - the density of the skyscrapers there means that the wind whistles through the gaps inbetween, which is one reason why they call it the Windy City.
Absolutely. Sunshine all day and windy all night. I can vouch for the traffic generated wind too. As a cyclist along Mts Bay Road from uni to the city, it is always a headwind when travelling east even when there is a seabreeze. That must be the traffic effect and it is not insignificant.
Perth is an excellent example of what could be done with this type of generation. Not only is there the multi lane freeways covering a large distance of coast but also there is a light rail system operating in the middle of the motorway lanes. I recall seeing similar in Chicago en route from airport to city. I can foresee that power could be generate from both sources of movement.
The added beauty of Perth is the wonderful amount of sunshine it receives.
@@sidslick1 yes one reason why they call it Windy City, but not THE reason.
Grade school kids have been wondering about why you can't put wind turbines on cars and recoup some energy for decades, in hind sight it's astounding no one thought of put the turbines on the side of the road sooner. This seems amazing and utterly worthwhile, I can't wait to see it on the side of the road
How much energy do the turbines produce and how much energy and resources are required to manufacture, transport and install them?
@@Withnail1969 how much time did it take you to type that, and how much time would have taken you to watch the video on which you are commenting?
@@Withnail1969 watch the video on which we are commenting?
btw I advocate nuclear for central power plants. We should also have solar on every roof and wind in every backyard though. :)
@@neutrino78x impossible, if we tried to replace the energy used in vehicles from fossil fuels with nuclear power, we would need 10,000 new nuclear power stations world wide and uranium resources would be exhausted within 20 years.
You cannot create energy by driving around. Basic thermodynamics.
Thanks for your comment on waisted energy. Finally someone understands, I've been talking about that for years, and people called me crazy.
I can't click on your videos quick enough! I love your way of presenting information, so clear and precise.
Thanks for sharing the cool video. This is a GREAT idea; I really hope that it works out as well in practice as they think it will! This could also solve another issue that we're facing here in the US: taxes on gasoline are used to maintain our roads. As more vehicles shift to electric, our wear and tear on the road remains constant but our maintenance budget shrinks. If those same roads could harvest energy from passing cars, that could be sold back to the grid in order to help cover road maintenance costs!
Living in the crazy windy, traffic damned city of Cape Town , with rolling blackouts constantly looming I had this same idea for street lamps last year!! Awesome to see someone actually built a working version! Perhaps I should actually pursue figuring out a diy version and see if there is any real local interest
I'm sure no one will think of taking one off a lamppost
@@jmus6494 Well, we don't seem to have a big issue with people stealing lampposts, or solar panels off of signs. History seems to lean in the direction of: thieves are lazy.
@@Kineth1 hate to be cynical. There is a huge problem stealing manhole covers, cell tower batteries, water meters ( if metal). All depends if there is any value to be gained
just gotta weld all that shit together. also, harder to steal if it's literally by lamp posts on busy streets.
@@jmus6494 No worries about the cynicism. They said these would be made mostly of composite materials, and weigh in under 10 kilos. Composites don't have much (if any) scrap value, and it looks like the amount of copper is going to be very little as well, so if anybody were going to go to the effort to steal something like this, it would have to be sold off as a whole unit, or as parts for this unit in particular, which makes the theft easily traceable to the the sale. That isn't a good deal for the thief or the "scrap dealer".
But cell tower batteries? Break them down into individual cells and they can go straight to ebay. I can definitely see the value in stealing those.
Would love to see this technology become available on a residential-sized scale. After that? Perhaps small, portable units that could be used by campers, caravaners and van-lifers to boost their off-grid capabilities when in favorable locales like the U.S. West. Something small and light enough to be popped on the roof while camped, and easily broken down for travel.
I have your answers. I can build any turbine of any size. Take a look at this. This was a prototype. Next step is 3 times bigger.
studio.ruclips.net/user/videoddN5awFx254/edit
I know it is not like the new turbines with blades. The reason that the savonius works so awesome, it will reach a maximum and not exceed it. Now, if we are taking energy out of it, then we can make auto transmissions that will increase the gear ratio to the electric side and increase energy output all while staying within a sort of natural norm. I am actually designing a giant turbine. Thank you and have a nice day. Don Watkins III
Sometimes a video comes along that poses an idea so obvious that it makes me feel dumb for not having thought of it myself. This is one of those! Man, what a cool tech! I really hope this takes off. There are so many millions of miles that this could be applied to!
I agree 100%!!!
It's not new. This idea has been around for a long while and as the man said, there are a number of videos of people making their own.
Great insight into an honestly obscured method of energy generation. While large solar, wind, and nuclear installations are the key areas of investment and development that ought be prioritized, these types of technologies are crucial in making our energy sector more resilient. The decentralization of power generation, while it comes with its own hurdles, allows for a more versatile and reliant power grid.
You could have also looked at flower turbines. It's a Dutch company that makes quite esthetically pleasing small scale vertical wind turbines. Those can also be placed next to each other in a certain pattern to make them more efficient.
Bad product. Low energy returns and the 'tulip' wind turbine does cast shades on the leaves (blades), which make them inefficient too. Vertical wind turbines are just not very efficient, I highly doubt this video, where other vids from this channel are great.
@@91Wtr how does shade casting affect performance?
@@tthecreator743 shade from the windmill ('flower') on the solar panels ('leaves') below (see the 'tulip' design and you see what i mean). The solar panels will work badly because of the shade from the mill.
I was just thinking… a neighbour has a vent for his loft space. It has a rotating ball shaped vane that turns when the wind is blowing. Replace this with a larger version to generate even more off the roof. What a great complement to Solar PV.
I don’t think the birds would complain.
When can I have one?
Excellent video.
This channel has some of the best content on RUclips.
Fantastic - so much potential. What about using them in the London underground tunnels as the trains rush by?
There’s no free space to install them and they would aggravate the piston effect that requires energy to overcome.
You should into the actual design of the tube. They have massive ducts to alleviate the piston effects already
@@mostlymessingabout which gives a great location for banks of them - right within the ducts themselves and what bypasses the turbines would cool them nicely.
@@spvillano since it's a duct. It would be easier to just use a normal axial turbine. However, dust is a big issue. You wouldn't want to send a chimney boy up there to clean it every month... there is already very limited time window for any track maintenance
We definitely need this on our Autobahns here in Germany.
It's Germany, you will see those kind of technologies, if everything goes well, in about 250 years. 🤣
@@entyropy3262 gut Ding will Weile haben
8MW on German Autobarn
You should be able to power Europe 😁
@@entyropy3262 Actually, Germany is steaming ahead quite quickly when it come to uptake of renewable energy.
As always flawless argument😀
I have seen a lot of big city streets that have become wind tunnels because of the size and orientation of the buildings. Also the summer heated air raising from the streets might power a system like this.
City heating is actually a massive problem in its own right these days, both because it leads to extra heat stroke issues when people are outdoors but also because people indoors tend to use immense amounts of power on fans and AC. There is a lot of effort right now being put towards building cities in ways that reduce the buildup of heat. Lots of ideas from (older) cities in the Middle East, north Africa, India, etc where they've had to no choice but to deal with city heat through smart architecture for centuries prior to the invention of AC.
Of course having good designs is one thing. Finding the hundreds of trillions of dollars to retrofitting (or rebuild) office towers around the world is quite a different problem, and one that applies to any effort of addressing the city heat problem. Finding options that can be bolted onto existing infrastructure (and not be a horrific eye-sore since poor aesthetics alone is enough to deter people no matter the benefits) is a heck of a challenge.
@@altrag You do know that you point out that cities are a heat trap . So those that claim the planet is getting warmer because of CO2 may be basing their argument on Temperature reading in growing cities and the increased heat they make from roads buildings , car trucks , Air conditioning etc . There is some food for thought .
@@grahamoldfield3474 Wow. Neat idea. But it turns out scientists aren't that stupid, and they take measurements all over the planet, including the middle of the ocean and the arctic and wherever else that most definitely is not subject to city heating.
Yes, this is something some have already done experiments for, I think over a decade ago.
@@altrag Maybe you want to have a look at what the Australia department says repeatedly and releases PR claiming hottest day etc etc to the Media . They have been shown to have been deceitful or outright lied about hottest days , highest rainfall , actually deleted historical records etc . They have tried to argue that city developed ares with roads and carpark etc cannot increase temperature . Yet on other occasions they say it does , you cannot have it both ways and be truthful .
Just 'Ave a Think - very pleased to have found your channel.
If they're currently working on that, I'd love to see if they can actually come close these numbers in the field. Maybe you can keep an eye on it for the future?
Or maybe you can yarodin
There is no way they can; their calculation (3MW produced by 125 turbines) is wrong by three orders of magnitude. Check out @Jeffrey Lebowski's comment and calculation.
Will do
@@JustHaveaThink Thank you and for your usually great content. For this video though, there were some serious doubts expressed regarding the numbers you mentioned in the video. Maybe you could address that since they were an order of magnitude off. Did these number come from the companies website or did you do those calculations on your own?
They say the o2 install would "help" power 23 houses. As would an AA battery.
you are a wonderful person dave, an absolute joy to listen to, i could easily sit here and listen to you waffle on for hours about all sorts of awesome stuff, your joyful character, pleasant demeanor and unbiased outlook on the subjects you present certainly make me .....JUST HAVE A THINK.....
I think this is an incredible idea - hopefully, the performance targets are achieved. 😃👌👌👌👏👏👏👏
The cell tower placement for these vertical axis turbines makes excellent sense, both for robust service and for lessening grid demand. Thank you Dave for the wonderful presentation! 🎁🌞🌄🌀
Looking at the turbines and considering the location of a nearby commercial property, that's a couple of hundred meters on two property borders that are right of way for two superhighways at right angles to each other. Add in, the property itself occupies the top of a rather large hill, there's also quite a bit of ambient wind on top of what could be harvested from the edge of the right of way.
I'll have to sit down tomorrow and crunch the numbers, but I suspect that the business' electric bill could drop into the negatives frequently enough and be offset to below petty cash prices mostof the time.
Great news. I wish them success with this project. Good presentation too, thanks.
I want to thank you for posting this video. For more than 4 years, I have been thinking about how nice it would be to harvest the wind generated by vehicles driving on highways. I had proposed that my son, then in 8th grade, put together a science project looking at vibration type wind generators (e.g. like blades of grass), but his teacher shot down the idea as infeasible. Your video brings many ideas to the front line of future alternative energy solutions and I applauded your efforts. I also applaud your quick correction, as many folks don’t like recognizing when a mistake has been made. Very nicely done. If I had any engineering skills, I would be working hard to improve alternative energy systems as I believe our future and the future of our planet depend on it. Thank you!
Hi Oswald. Thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated. You might like to check out this latest video from a RUclips colleague.
ruclips.net/video/iWGfB4najfM/видео.html
It actually features precisely the type of bladeless wind 'turbine' that you described in your message
Thx. I spent the last hour getting acquainted with Rosie, at your suggestion. She is brilliant. I will look at the additional link soon. All the best, O
Love this video and another step could be a more portable model installed on balconies across the worlds apartment complexes if you can create a smaller compact plugin version that feeds energy back in to the network.
I’d love to see the fins of those highway turbines built of bamboo. Perhaps each fin could be made from a section of bamboo steamed into the correct curvature - green, renewable, biodegradable yet capable of withstanding years of weather, cheap, and lightweight.
Bamboo yes, but even better built from recycled plastics, which will last a lifetime. There is another British company that is building solar panels from virtually 100% recycled materials.
I'm happy I found you - well balanced commentary, well presented, a product with great potential = a new subscriber
Who hasn't over the years thought of things like this?There's a section of motorway near us which has a dual carriageway underneath.The movement of that section I have thought should with some clever bods working at it click on a generator of sorts to provide energy!
Although it is above my head your output is very encouraging and a welcome treat.Thank you.
Brilliant. I've love to see these installed across the US during our "infrastructure week."
It'd be great Ken but don't know if the fossil fuel and existing utilities lobbies would think so!
I've been interested in these for a while, i think they would reduce noise and probably look better too. Many busy freeways have walls now which probably cost more than some vawt.
This is an absolutely inspiring video. I hadn't even considered harvesting energy generated by traffic. Lots of chatter about the vertical turbines... going way back to the Cousteau Society Ship with vertical turbines instead of sail. Thank you so much, you have a new subscriber! I'm glad to have happened upon this video!
For backup on sunny days, a parabolic mirrored disk focused on a closed-loop 'steam-turbine' generator could also produce power for the lamps with surplus returned to the grid... would add new shapes to the 'skyline' too.
I remember the Alcyone !en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcyone_(ship)
I got another one for you. Decades ago I saw the following in Popular Mechanics magazine: They proposed putting pressure plats in the highway system before tollways. Cars had to (break and) slow down anyway. As cars drove up onto the plate and depressing it pumped hydraulic fluid through a pipe to the side of the road to run a generator.
Do some research on vawts. They don't make much power at all. Anytime they're spinning some of the blades are pushing into the wind. They're a novelty. If you are designing a bunch of highway lighting and adding these spinners to them doesn't break the bank I'd be for it but all the previous work and sales of vawts has shown they put out a small fraction of a similarly sized hawt. It's the physics of lift versus push.
vawts are just much less efficient at capturing the energy in the wind.
Its a terrible idea - given their number for windspeed of 5.4m/s and a blade size of 2x0.5m the air only has 100 watts of power (kinetic energy passing through the blade area per second).
So even if they were really efficient like 35% they would only generate 35 watts each...
Nowhere near 2.5kw or 24kw as they claim in the video.
Dont believe me?
Search powerequation for windpower and plug in all of the numbers your self - its not complicated just kinetic energy...
Sounds like a great invention, I want one for my home, we are top of a hill and get a lot of wind especially in the winter.
The retrofit approach is genius.
I’m not expecting perfection. All I ask is that you do the best you can with what you’ve got.
Cuz lovin’ is what I got
How do you fit a wind turbine on a pole that has one end in a motorway and the other end has a big light on top ? It must be genius as I can see no way of doing it, can you ?
@@goldmagnet9013 I had the same question... most likely the pole has to be cut, or at least removed, and then 'retrofitted' - or -longshot- a clamshell design, which seems nearly impossible for the alignment of the moving parts, bearings, etc. Perhaps our professor will make a follow up video on how these are installed.
@@rickdworsky6457A follow up video would be great. I had a look at their prototypes and they are very primitive. This really is an idea not a product, and the figures that are quoted would need a new type of physics to be discovered.
I had a colleague research this a few years ago for her capstone, I'm sending her this video
I've wanted verticals to get more attention for years.
Something I didn't catch you mention, is the likely fact that the overall gas consumption will increase on the road. Putting obstacles alongside the road is to me pretty obvious makes the "air friction" increase.
I've wondered for years why all new buildings don't have VAWTs, especially in such a windy place as Perth, Western Australia.
Or, Chicago, Illinois.
VAWTS should be installed in all legislative chambers. Can you imagine all the energy generated by all that hot air?
Making each turbine blade flexible would allow it to present a greater surface area going downwind and therefore possibly increase its performance. On the upwind leg it would retract slightly to reduce air resistance. A hinged blade with limited movement would work in a similar manner but be more complex to manufacture.
Perpetual motion machine tard.
Great video as always 👍👍 The thing that shocks me is about the ideas that I would have never thought of
As awesome as this would be if it works there is one thing that keeps coming to mind. These turbines use the air off of vehicles to turn. That means that very likely having a bunch of them on roadways may cause significant turbulence and air resistance, disrupting vehicles ability to push air out of the way.
Allowing you to still harvest the energy sure, but potentially drastically reducing vehicles fuel efficiencies in thos areas and possibly making the energy waste problem even worse.
It would be nice to see if they have tested this yet, and what their findings have been.
A house owner can sell surplus energy back to the grid. The more ways a house can generate electricity the better.
Court Defendant: Yes I was exceeding the posted speed limit by around 100mph.
But considering how much energy I was generating, you should be paying me.
Nice enough, but a single court session brobably costs 1000 times more than the value of energy generated.
@@viljosavolainen2286 Not if everyone is breaking the speed limit ;-)
@@2002RM well that would be interesting to calculate, how many more accidents would we willing to accept. Then again if everyone went certain speed then that should be the actual speed limit.
@@viljosavolainen2286 I see an opportunity there, an increased number of deaths due to accidents, would lower the energy consumption of the society, and we could also harvest more energy if we use the corpses for biomass. Just have a think!
@@TheAlchaemist i dont believe that death rate vould increase that much compared to more energy needed for increased speed. Atleast some of the accidents wont be fatal so partisipants will also require new vehicles. The energy gained from this system is brobably quite miniscule albeit possibly still cost effective way to get some energy back.
I love it. Small and decentralized. No dead birds or fiberglass blade graveyards. Good job!
No energy production to speak of either. The reason there are no bird deaths is there are virtually no installations, 100 years after Savonius invented them.
I have returned and watched this for a second time. Definitely a very exciting prospect.
Very clever - I like this one! That is seriously clever innovation.
This for once sounds like a goldmine, unlike many other ideas. They can be basically installed on every pole around the world, even on the poles of solar panels or normal wind turbines ^.^
Yeah the fact that it can be installed on poles that *already have existing wiring* is a masterstroke of genius.
@@4saken404 ... it can also be installed on poles without wiring... Then it will cost slightly more, but at least you still have not install an extra pole.
On solar panels they throw a shadow. On wind turbines the wind turbine already takes a lot of the wind, behind the blades there is a lot of turbulence and little energy.
Bleeding brilliant!
This channel fosters hope as it emphasizes foresight.
This is fabulous... imagine every house, every pole down a major motorway... it would be a massive influx of power. So much easier than putting a solar array on your roof, and so much easier to replace your roof vs having a ton of solar panels you have to remove first. Great channel, subscribed !
I had not thought about augmenting solar with wind at my house until now, but one thing climate change has brought to southeastern Michigan is lots of wind!
Put these next to the railroad track that goes through our small town and it could light up all the streets
Here in Valencia there is a plan to install these turbines in a tower in the marina entrance to supply all the power needed by the marina itself. It is planned as a prooving ground for the system developed by the university here but is a fine example of what you have detailed in this video.
Oh god. I’m listening to an English man talk about renewable energy at 4 am again.
You think that's bad? I'm doing it in the middle of the day.
9.50 in the morning here in Aus, what a great way to start your day, need more of this tech applied worldwide.
0443 here in Columbia, Missouri. Love this channel! Can’t get enough!!
Ditto Cabbage Heads…. It’s 6am in Colorado. I love how he thinks!
@Ember Rhapsody Certainly agree with your comment, problem is there are not enough people with the will to do that. In light of the lack of science knowlege in the community today, it would be impossible to get complience.
I live in a windy location and would love to have one.
Please contact me ...
eat less air
Why should the person contact you?
get a real, proved-by-data horisontal windmill instead. This design is super inefficient.
get one then
Question: wouldn't the vehicles need to push harder, and use more fuel, because of these turbines? Yes there is always wasted airflow beside the traffic, but would the vehicles need to spend more energy than the wind turbine will extract? If that is not the case, which I hope is true, this is a fantastic idea! Thank you for the amazing content!
Absolutely they would. This is basically the same idea as putting a wind turbine *on* your car to harvest energy from your driving speed and the wind that results. Any energy the wind has came from the car, in this case.
That's my concern. Would the air displaced by vehicles meet more resistance with these installed? Perhaps a better option would be to install them at the top of the lamposts to pick up any wind that's blowing about, well out of the way of the traffic.
@@GerryRR About putting a wind turbine on your car being a bad idea, it actually can have a net positive effect and generate valuable electricity! This is because the wind turbine has less drag compared to the front of our vehicles. I came across a channel named "Quint builds" that tested the idea recently, here's the video if you want to check it out yourself.
ruclips.net/video/tEPBdztGMdI/видео.html
Not sure if we can translate this experiment to lamp post turbines tho. The latter probably does not reduce drag on the vehicle. Though if we can tap into all the untilised wind energy for a little more fuel consumption, that might actually give positive results? Thanks!
@@vishank7 I mean, if what you were saying was true then you could build an electric car that powers itself. Nobody has done this, so I'm going to take a RUclipsrs experiments with a grain of salt.
@@GerryRR It does not generate enough electricity to power the entire vehicle. I was skeptical about the idea at first as well, though that guy is a credible science communicator and knows what he is doing. He uses more math than words to prove his point, do check the video out!
I had this idea some time ago and I am so happy to find that others are proving it works, well done Alfa 311.
I went from "stupid idea" to "bloody brilliant!" In the space of about two minutes. Thanks for another great vid Dave.
I've set up the electrical services for Cell Towers (I work for a power utility company) and they use a LOT of power. While I agree that putting one of these on a tower would be a good idea, I don't think it would be able to provide all the power needed... That being said, that shouldn't be a deterrent from putting one on anyways. The only issue is the stress one of these would put on a tower. If you guyed it in all directions, then it'd be fine, but these towers are very tall and the guys would need to extend out pretty far. It would most likely be cost-prohibitive for the comms companies to lease the extra land just for the turbine.
I worked in Telecoms and you’re correct -retrofitting horizontal or vertical wind turbines to an existing structure can be very expensive. Then there’s the cost of maintenance by a specialised work force. Solar wins out on whole of life costs.
Then put up two of them. Or three. You get the idea. Imagination (creativity) is more important than knowledge - Albert Einstein
@@bobbyp21 I think you might be misunderstanding something... People (Companies) aren't going to do something that will lose them money. We have so many fantastic technologies that don't get used because they're not cost-effective. So, while Einstein was correct in his quote about creating new things or renovating old things, when it comes to implementing them, he is not.
After all, having a ring of solar panels in orbit around the sun while beaming all that delicious solar energy back to earth via microwaves is a very creative idea. It would solve the world's energy problems immediately... Extremely creative... but until technology catches up to the point where it's cost-effective, it will never be done.
There are two sources of humanity's greatest innovation... one is War, unfortunately, and the other is when someone figures out a way to make an expensive process cheaper.
I love the idea of putting these vertical turbines along a roadway. America should implement this immediately. I believe it would be cost-effective and it would make use of something we only thought of as waste... wind created by passing cars.
That Vawt looks like some of the experimental open-source wind turbines that Robert Murray-Smith builds in his shop in England.
Yes strange, and Robert Murry Smith never produces proper figures for any of his windmill designs either. This is not about making wind turbines, its about selling shares in the company before they are found out.
@@goldmagnet9013 Exactly, it is not like he couldn't do it, but I guess the numbers were so disappointing to him that he just skipped the embarrassment.
@@tzenophile Yes Murray Smiths channel is just rubbish, he shows his "members" how to build stuff that does not perform, and will not last. Hes build 6 of 7 turbines now, all utterly useless, and he never publishes standard values of their outputs. Its just about making videos, that's it. Now this channel - the guys got a degree, surely he can spend 15 minutes doing a little maths before making a nice video on something that does not stack up, very disappointing.
@@goldmagnet9013 There should be a youtube parallel to Beall’s list of predatory/fake academic journals, where we could document false claims of the dubious tubers...
@@tzenophile I dont have the time to do that, but it might be handy. I like this channels presenting style, I have looked at 2 videos this one and the turbulent turbine. Both are mathematically flawed and a short time spent researching would have made a huge difference, unless the channel is being paid to promote these products ?
Bunkers !!! It's all Good and Exciting, Thanks, David San Fransisco