MIT researchers recently demonstrated the feasibility of "tension-leg" platforms, a technology that oil companies have recently adopted for deep-water rigs. The wind turbines and towers would be assembled at a shipyard and placed on top of large floating cylinders (see images). The canisters would be ballasted on the bottom with high-density concrete to keep the structure from tipping over, and the whole turbine assembly would be tugged out to sea. There, four steel cables would be attached to the platform, anchoring it to the sea floor. First, though, some water would be allowed into the cylinder, causing the structure to sink more into the water. Once the cables are attached, the water is pumped back out again, allowing the turbine to rise, tightening the cables, and preventing the turbine from bobbing up and down, yet allowing some lateral movement that would help cushion the impact of storm waves on the tower. (The blades themselves would be high enough to avoid even waves from hurricanes.) The cable tension can be adjusted for different weather conditions, says Paul Sclavounos, professor of mechanical engineering and naval architecture at MIT. Based on wind-speed measurements, researchers at MIT, led by Stephen Connors, director of the Analysis Group for Regional Electricity Alternatives, calculated that large turbines located far offshore could ultimately cost less per power generated than either land-based turbines or near-offshore ones, even factoring in extra costs, such as much longer underground electricity transmission cables. The upside: much more fast and steady wind, which would allow the turbines to generate power at 50 percent capacity on average throughout the year, compared with 30 percent or less with on-land turbines. Offshore wind farms could also have the advantage of being close to big cities, unlike wind farms in remote areas, which require significant power grid upgrades to transport the power to places where it's needed. "I personally see this as the endgame," says GE's Lyons. "We'll see gigawatt-scale projects delivering clean energy to the East Coast. But making the technology cheap enough to be feasible will not be easy. "You've got to push all the buttons to get the costs down," Lyons says. Using a combination of far-offshore and land-based farms, however, one day it may be possible to provide 20 percent of U.S. energy from wind, he says. |
A More Durable Wind Turbine
12/04/2009









Comments
05/08/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
Join the club. Push the envelope further.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
Oceanic windpower only makes sense for tropical islands that have sweet trade winds. They also have 'small' energy demand. Pumped storage would work for them, as would reverse osmosis water production.
But truly large scale wind energy production is out of the question in our lifetimes.
Ultimately, wind will always be a niche.
Hydropower is the real solution. The tropics abound with fantastic hydro-energy that is not being exploited. There are enough hydro-watts to power the planet as it stands.
05/10/2006
Posts:1
05/10/2006
Posts:1
I disagree. If you adhere to massive land farms of the Pickens Plan, for instance, you are spending a lot of money on land acquisition, legal battles, tensions with local populations, etc. (Pickens might disagree, since he mysteriously owns a lot of the land in the wind corridor)
Far offshore rigs combined with unpopulated desert solar and wave energy is the future I think. It has the interesting cultural side effect of making us think about space colonization as well, if you really want to push day dreaming to the next level. The idea that you can create energy out of nowhere and maybe live near that energy...
JTG
10/31/2008
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/12/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
It may seems a little strange.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
city buildings. The only real argument is having them in shipping lanes near cities.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
http://www.industcards.com/wind-ireland.htm
I think they look fantastic. Especially if the alternative is a particularly nondescript stretch of the Irish sea.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
Steven
www.SurvivingPlanet.com
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
Hmmm. I wonder how many batteries will be needed to run a city?
05/09/2006
Posts:1
One way U can back up a wind power farm would be to build hydrogen fuel cells at the wind farm site. When the wind blows, they convert the water to hydrogen. When the wind stops, the fuel cell acts as a giant battery and provides electricity, by converting the hydrogen back to water. The cycle repeats over and over, with minimal loss of electical power flow.
05/11/2006
Posts:1
But I do wish people like Ted Kennedy would be more consistent on their views. Don't claim to support wind energy and then refuse to have wind turbines put up in their area. Personally, I think they look pretty slick.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
Hal.
GAtineau, QC.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/16/2006
Posts:1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3063433.stm
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/11/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
And exactly how much are the turbines going to slow down the wind? And if these turbines are built far offshore, what will the affect be?
Constructing an office building slows down the wind. Flying a kite slows down the wind. Planting trees slows down the wind. I'm not buying the butterfly effect.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/10/2006
Posts:1
05/11/2006
Posts:1
05/14/2006
Posts:1
07/26/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/10/2006
Posts:1
05/16/2006
Posts:1
05/09/2006
Posts:1
So if we flip each "vs" to a plus (+), that'll make more sense to me.
Today's power plants are really just portfolios of turbines from different energy sources. When natural gas is cheap, they fire the gas turbines and ease up on the coal furnaces. And when natural gas prices shoot up, they let the gas turbines rest and rely on the coal furnaces. So even today, there's not a single source used for power generation. All we are doing with wind/solar/etc. is give additional support to the grid so we're not dependent on any single source of turbine fuel.
Competition is a wonderful thing.
05/10/2006
Posts:1
Such generators do not need high rpm to punch out plenty of EMF.
Further, homopolar generators are DC and might well be rigged to electrolyze hydrogen on the spot.
Clever anode membranes could repress chlorine production, eliminating the need for fresh water.
All manner of synchronization issues would be dead, and the voltages throughout the design would be nominal.
This concept ought to be pursued as a real route to the hydrogen economy.
The first, best use of the output: increased refinery efficiency. Convert 'bottoms' to 'tops'.
05/09/2006
Posts:1
05/10/2006
Posts:1
If there cheap enough to mass manufacture, I wouldn't mind seeing solar panels just about everywhere that people couldn't see them (on top of buildings, light poles, bus stops, and perhaps even wind turbines.
05/10/2006
Posts:1
This effect is do to the way our brains recognize optic input as real or noise.
The use of dazzle painting ended with radar. It didn't fool the beam.
05/10/2006
Posts:1
05/10/2006
Posts:1
06/20/2006
Posts:1
07/30/2006
Posts:1