Leave a Comment:
(116) comments
This is another misleading article about the capabilities of the pictured turbine. The energy extracted from the wind depends upon the cross-section of the intercepted flow. Articles, such as this tend to be self-promotional, often to draw in investors who do not have the technical knowledge to critically analyze what is presented. Many people feel no shame in fooling people who believe that by investing in such things they are creating a better future for future generations.
Reply
There’s no commentary just annoying music and very few facts apart from 200 Watts near the end.
Reply
Every house should have one possibly aided by grants to reduce individual household bills and national fossil fuel imports/dependence. Could easily be done if the political will was there.
Reply
Would cover most things except big power surge stuff like kettles and large widescreen tv’s.
Reply
Things like this are why I keep my FB account. Technology to help fuel the world.
Reply
No they couldn’t
This particular turbine picture pops up from time to time with wild claims and unproven performance figures
In addition, multiple studies have shown that there is not enough good quality wind available in most urban environments to produce any significant power.
Many of these rooftop turbine designs cannot be fitted to 1 1/2 storey houses like we have here.
Reply
This could be better than solar because it could work at night and the design looks like it would trap the slightest breeze.
Reply This thing keeps popping up despite the fact that it’s mostly rubbish. There is no credible performance data and, after years of publicity, it has not progressed beyond an early design concept.
Reply
Jeff, I have ,several times over the years, hence my comments. If you have more up to date info showing performance data I would love to see it.
Reply
Thank you Mark Thur, not for the link, but for showing how narrow minded an quick to pre-judge people are. “Probably Nuclear Junkies” !!!!!
Reply Thank you Mark Thur, not for the link, but for showing how narrow minded an quick to pre-judge people are. “Probably Nuclear Junkies” !!!!!
Reply That brochure has been around for a while now and they still haven’t fixed the basic engineering errors in it. And there is still no performance data available. It all appears to be fluff and nonsense.
Reply
It takes a pretty stiff breeze. If I’m reading the power data correctly, you get 27 watts/hr at a wind speed of 8 m/s (which converts to almost 18 miles/hour.) An accounting of energy inputs from manufacture (mining the materials, fabricating and shipping) vs the output over the life ot the system needs to be done before it can be considered sustainable.
Reply
What’s your take Kermit? I tried to access the company link through and got nothing.
Sounds like a great idea, and I hope it’s viable.
Yeah, I tried too. It’s an interesting idea. There have been small-scale wind turbine attempts before, so we’ll see. We’ll also see what community zoning will do to accommodate these. I think PV is way ahead of them.
Reply I dont need the patent,,,,, if these were built inside high rise roof vents with lower to upper fins then they would run all the time . they would run when there is no wind.
Reply
Wow sounds like a winner to me need more innovation like this and get away from fossil fuels
Reply
Proven not to work, payback time far too long and promised output never achueved. If you want ‘free’ energy, probably best to look to solar. Or spend the money on insulation and changing to LED lighting.
Reply
“Could ” is the deciding word here….I think solar panels would beat this one hands down on cost and appearance….
Reply
Why do you persist in posting this rubbish. It didn’t work when you first published it, or the second, or third, or any other time. It’s a lame duck. It will never fly, never.
Reply
Specifics? You’re right, I’ve seen the post before. Why do you say it will “never fly”?
Reply
Clickbait garbage like most of ecocrap posts. The average house uses 10Kw/day. We use 20+. Pissing into the wind!
Reply Tim Cooley the basic design is flawed and it will never approach the efficiency of multi-blade turbines like the 3-blade turbines currently in use. Now, the current turbines are also limited in their efficiency due to a number of factors so that this turbine will be even more limited.
The website for the turbine has been around for a few years now and still has no performance data , only some vague statements about performance and, last time I looked, they were still trying to lure investors with unsubstantiated claims.
Reply 
This could be a nice combination with solar panels. People working to produce energy by different ways. The expensive component are the batteries which make the alternative systems difficult to adopt by household users in third world countries where there is shortage of electricity. There fore research should be done to invent or produce these storage components that are affordable for middle class people and they last longer.
Reply
Neat idea. Europeans are moving rapidly to develop alternate sources of energy so they can leave the grid. Elan Musk recently stated and proved that 100 sq. miles of a solar field along with 1 sq. mile of battery field could POWER THE ENTIRE U.S. needs. At first that seems awfully large until you realize that an area 10 miles by 10 miles in a western desert is not a very large area of that one desert.
Reply
Heard this for about 3 years now.. are you gonna publicly release them already?? probably not. Imagine the amount of money the energy companies would lose..
Reply
I have a fairly small solar and wind system and it saves at least 50 -60% every month on my power bill.
Reply The one shown of 750mm. diameter produces 200 Watts. That my lighting sorted on windy day.
Reply
Simple aerodynamic equations, too much resistance is the main problem. Power (lift or motion) is achieved by making air flow faster over a surface causing movement by coefficient of drag, too much drag (resistance) causes air to flow around it not through it. To offer an example a parachute old design has a hole in the top allowing air to escape this makes it stable as it falls without that hole air would flow around it not through it causing it to fall out of control and too fast because a vortex will form above it actually forcing it down. I’ve seen many wind power designs that fail because they lack simple aerodynamic efficiency. I could offer more examples and I’ve designed windturbines which are extremely efficient. If you’ve ever sailed you might know that it takes one square meter of sail for one horsepower, the same is true for windmills.
Though this might be able to recharge a cellphone in a few days.
Actually pretty sound looking small , for an off grid house might be one of the answers. My question would be cost of putting one in and technical difficulties.
Reply
There’s a lot of these gadgets on here but where would you get one. Haven’t found one yet and judging by my last power bill might have to get one if I want to eat.
Reply
I wouldn’t bother unless you can put it on a mast taller than all the buildings around you ( on your roof is probably illegal, and would likely damage the structure .) It also helps if you live somewhere with constant gales. Mawson Station in Antarctica is one of the windiest places on Earth and they still only get half their power from wind. In Denmark the capacity factor of onshore wind turbines is 24% – and most of them are much taller and more productive than a backyard turbine.
Reply
Marlo S. Johnston, rumor has it there’s wind in Oklahoma:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbrnXl2gO_k
Reply
Farishta Waldrop I think they may stay away because of the noise they make. They would be pre warned.
Reply
No where near the amount pet cats are responsible for. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/15683843
Reply
I’ve been seeing article about this exact design for the last 15-20 years or so, so much I don’t even click on link anymore… yet not one on a rooftop
Reply
The electric companies have made sure there are laws forbidding going off grid even partially.
Reply
I’m surprised to learn that many US citizens get such poor choice, given the country’s pro-freedom stance: Some states/counties only have one power supplier, some have laws prohibiting choice.
Here in the UK, we have few or no restrictions on choice of energy supplier or use of off-grid technologies. I kinda expected better from the States, ya know?
And if you install two holy smokes… Look out the coal and nuclear huggers will send someone to assanate you.
Reply
That is not half a household consumption. It’s like half a months consumption here in Canada.
Reply
We’ve heard they make a hell of a racket by vibrating through the house and therefore put people off them. ?
Reply