Jump to content

NWDA Wind Turbine


Peter T
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why can't Broomhead just accept that what was perhaps a well meaning project has been a waste of public money and invite tenders for someone else to try it out in a more suitable location. Was there ever any reseach into viability and if not why did Planning accepgt the application ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pedro and Peter

You are quite right.I am stricken with a nasty virus at the moment and am not fit for much else. What is your excuse?

 

Anyway, the news page has revealed the reason for the turbine''s inactivity. It seems a pretty reasonable explanation to me, or would you rather it go cartwheeling across Warrington, decapitating a few people on the way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pedro and Peter

You are quite right.I am stricken with a nasty virus at the moment and am not fit for much else. What is your excuse?

 

Anyway, the news page has revealed the reason for the turbine''s inactivity. It seems a pretty reasonable explanation to me, or would you rather it go cartwheeling across Warrington, decapitating a few people on the way?

 

Toss up whether to quote Egbert or Geoff!!!!!

Egbert, I have a virus/cold so don't use that as your excuse.

 

I was curious as to why it wasn't working. Are we not allowed to ask questions/

 

I shall now ask another.

 

When these things were designed and a patent applied for, AND permission granted by WBC to install it, wouldn't these sort of problems have been tested??????

 

Normally, any potential dangers are highlighted and tested and necessary restrictions applied.

 

Geoff, do you blindly embrace new ideas and technology or do you question and analyse before being led by the nose???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete I'm not able to unravel what it is you are getting however research indicates that

wind machines were used in Persia as early as 200 B whilst the Eclipse windmill factory was set up around 1866 in Beloit,Winconsin. Firms like Star, Dempster, and Aeromotor produced hundreds of thousands of mills before rural electrification in the States. Some had small direct-current generators used to charge storage batteries, to provide power to lights, or to operate a radio receiver.
So the concept and practice is not new.

 

I'm not sure if you are anti wind power as an Energy Source or you are just having a go and Steve Broomhead and the NWDA. Either way Gary has given a good and plausible explanation as to why it has been switched off which you seem not to believe for whatever reason.

 

Never mind it will be soon 2010 and more inventions to use. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As my article explains - one wind turbine suffered damage in exceptionally high winds. As a precautionary measure other wind turbines were switched off while the cause was investigated.

So explaining in a little more detail .... If as expected it was simply one faulty wind turbine which buckled under extreme pressure, the others will be switched back on once they have passed more stringent health and safety tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wave power still makes a lot more sense than anything else, especially as we're an island. (Someone suggested that taking some of the power out of incoming waves may possibly help reduce erosion of the coastline as well, but I don't know if that's feasible or not.)

 

Apparently Margaret Thatcher scuppered this. She gave the nuclear industry the responsibility of calculating the cost per killowatt, and of course they came up with a much higher figure than their own cost, which suited Thatcher's own nuclear weapons agenda - of course.

 

The true cost was quite a bit lower than the cost of the nuclear industry generating the equivalent amount of power, but by the time that was determined the decision had been taken based on the false figure and our wave power options had been sunk. So by now we could be 20/25 years into a green energy programme that would make sense and be largely invisible to most of us.

 

It might be added that we'd need a lot less power if people didn't waste it with things like leaving their TV on standby for long periods. Back in the early 90s it was reported that enough power was wasted this way per day to power Birmingham. The figure now if probably far higher, as far more people do things the lazy way than they did 15 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As my article explains - one wind turbine suffered damage in exceptionally high winds. As a precautionary measure other wind turbines were switched off while the cause was investigated.

So explaining in a little more detail .... If as expected it was simply one faulty wind turbine which buckled under extreme pressure, the others will be switched back on once they have passed more stringent health and safety tests.

 

Not questioning the report Gary.

I am questioning why/whether tests were done in the Development stages as to what level of wind speed was the maximum?

 

IMO this should be standard practise, and when the wind speed reaches a certain level, it automatically cuts out.

 

Dismayed, I am glad that the aircraft don't adopt your "learn as we fly" approach. There would be hundreds of plane bits crashing through our houses. :roll: Can you see NASA taking that approach?? :shock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always thought these were designed for installation where the wind is strong and as Warrington isn?t on top of a mountain, I wouldn?t have thought there could be any serious over speed issues.

 

I think the bigger problem lies not so much with the turbine but the issues created by installing it in such a populated location.

 

As Eagle rightly says ?A wind turbine that doesn't work in the wind, brilliant.? :lol:

 

Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure risk assesmnets are carried out but such is life Obs that 'learning' tends to be an ongoing experience... and most learning comes from mistakes and unexpected happenings :wink:

 

No, but it could be construed that it was what you were implying.

I am saying that the detail is thrashed out in the Development stage, not making it up (learning) as they go along.

That's why they have these R and D departments. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One should never 'construe' what they believe another may or may not be implying Peter :lol:

 

As for some R&D departments :lol: concept, analysis, design, prototype, more analysis, beta test, more design, more beta test, full scale model, even more tests, blah blah blah, comercialisation.. then failure :shock::lol:

 

The system works well then.... and like Eagle said... a wind turbine that doesn't work in the wind PRICELESS :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary, if you've got the time and interest, perhaps a piece on other renewable energy schemes in the area would be of interest. For example, the Mersey has two wiers (Howley and Martinscroft) which could potentially be harnessed to generate some electricty. Am I right when I say that I think the MSCC tried and failed to install a mini hydro scheme on the sluices at Latchford Locks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're struggling, by bringing flippancy into it. Did you look up R & D in Wikipedia?? or personal experience?????

 

Oooh you are grumpy these days Peter. I didn't realsie I was being 'flippant' though :roll:

 

..and NO I didn't look up R&D on Wikipedia... I worked in a R&D department for quite a few years before moving over to the computer programming side (Oracle), and testing, IT and design etc etc ..and my other half is a mechanical engineer and designer :P Simples :P:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James

 

I?m no expert but I don?t think the flow on the Mersey could generate much power even at the weirs because the head of water is only a couple of foot or so. The locks at Latchford might work but would necessitate reducing the flow in the lower section of the river into a trickle.

 

There?s plenty of umph at Latchford after heavy rain as

but for the best part of the year the sluices have to be kept closed to keep the canal navigable.

 

Interesting thought though.

 

Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James

 

I?m no expert but I don?t think the flow on the Mersey could generate much power even at the weirs because the head of water is only a couple of foot or so. The locks at Latchford might work but would necessitate reducing the flow in the lower section of the river into a trickle.

 

There?s plenty of umph at Latchford after heavy rain as

but for the best part of the year the sluices have to be kept closed to keep the canal navigable.

 

Interesting thought though.

 

Bill :)

 

Bill, that's at Latchford Locks, isn't it?

 

The weir at Victoria Park has at a guess about a 10 ft drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're struggling, by bringing flippancy into it. Did you look up R & D in Wikipedia?? or personal experience?????

 

Oooh you are grumpy these days Peter. I didn't realsie I was being 'flippant' though :roll:

 

..and NO I didn't look up R&D on Wikipedia... I worked in a R&D department for quite a few years before moving over to the computer programming side (Oracle), and testing, IT and design etc etc ..and my other half is a mechanical engineer and designer :P Simples :P:lol:

 

 

But you still work on a trial and error basis. :P:P:P

 

NOT being grumpy. A tad pedantic, maybe.

Given all the elf and safety that hets thrown at us these days, there should be NO room for error with something as potentially dangerous as a turbine. How did it get a patent? :shock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you still work on a trial and error basis. :P:P:P

 

I guess I asked for that one :lol::wink:

 

Given all the elf and safety that hets thrown at us these days, there should be NO room for error with something as potentially dangerous as a turbine. How did it get a patent? :shock:

 

Does an idea have to be FULLY functional, tested and compliant with all possible H&S legislation before it can be patented Peter :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it has to be compatible with current health and safety.

 

i don't think that you could make anything that was compliant with all possible health and safety. if you tried you would not even get a pair of socks patented. :lol:

even the ballpoint pen would struggle. remember there was a change in design to the tops a hole was put in so that if people swallowed them they would not choke.

 

it is the same with wind turbines. they are designed for certain conditions. winds speeds between certain tolerances, temperatures ditto. if they encounter conditions outside of these tolerances then there are problems which have to be addressed. in the case of one falling apart due to high winds then it may be a case of fitting governers or stronger blade mounts.

 

we get many reports of good being called in because of a design flaw or some other thing that was not spotted at the design stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...