Claim: all the energy we need is just a mile above our heads- but getting it is another story

Altaeros_Wind_Turbine_Wide[1]From NCAR, some wind pie in the sky.

A mother lode of wind power

Mapping the potential to harvest high-altitude wind

May 28, 2014 | What if all the energy needed by society existed just a mile or two above our heads? That’s the question raised by researchers in an emerging field known as airborne wind energy, which envisions using devices that might look like parachutes or gliders to capture electricity from the strong, steady winds that blow well above the surface in certain regions.

While logistical challenges and environmental questions remain, scientists at NCAR, the University of Delaware, and the energy firm DNV GL have begun examining where the strongest winds are and how much electricity they might be able to generate.

Sources of airborne wind energy: Forecast-model depiction of winds at 850-mb level on 1/30/13

This forecast-model depiction of winds at the 850-millibar level (about a mile above the surface) above the United States on January 30, 2013, shows a strong southerly low-level jet stream (red shading) across the Mississippi Valley, with speeds exceeding 60 knots (69 mph). Reliably strong winds at this height could serve as a valuable source of energy. (Image courtesy Weather Underground and Pennsylvania State University.)

Their key finding: winds that blow from the surface to a height of 3,000 meters (nearly 10,000 feet) appear to offer the potential to generate more than 7.5 terawatts—more than triple the average global electricity demand of 2.4 terawatts (as of 2012, according to the study). Among the areas where such winds are strongest: the U.S. Great Plains, coastal regions along the Horn of Africa, and large stretches of the tropical oceans.

This type of research could prove critical if airborne wind energy takes off. The growing industry now includes more than 20 startups worldwide, exploring various designs for devices that could be tethered to ground stations and then raised or lowered to capture the most suitable winds at any point in time.

“From an engineering point of view, this is really complicated,” said NCAR scientist Luca Delle Monache, a co-author of a new study examining these issues. “But it could greatly increase the use of renewable energy and move the U.S. toward the goal of energy independence.”

To estimate the potential of airborne wind energy, Delle Monache, with Cristina Archer at the University of Delaware and Daran Rife at DNV GL, turned to an NCAR data set known as Climate Four Dimensional Data Assimilation. It blends computer modeling and measurements to create a retrospective analysis of the hourly, three-dimensional global atmosphere for the years 1985–2005.

The research team looked for various types of wind speed maxima, including recurring features known as low-level jets. Such jets can be ideal for energy because their speed and density is as high or higher than jets at higher elevations that would be beyond the reach of tethered wind devices. They also blow more steadily than winds captured by conventional wind turbines near the surface, potentially offering a more reliable source of energy.

Low-level jets blowing at 30-50 miles per hour or more can be found at several locations worldwide, often close to mountainous terrain or to persistent atmospheric features that help focus and channel wind. One of the strongest low-level jets on Earth flows from the Gulf of Mexico north across the Great Plains.

A study by the scientists, published last month in Renewable Energy, focused on winds in January and July. The team is now looking for additional funding to provide a more complete picture of the potential of higher-level winds. Their main goals are to estimate the strength of the winds year round and to build an interface that would enable users to explore the strength of the winds over specific regions.

“It’s important to understand the magnitude of this resource and what might be possible,” Delle Monache said.

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

177 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 14, 2014 11:09 am

The energy is free, but the collectors aren’t.

milodonharlani
August 14, 2014 11:09 am

There’s also virtually unlimited energy in the oceans once fusion containment engineering problems are solved:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ck-daly/breakthrough-in-fusion-re_b_5064272.html

Nigel in Waterloo
August 14, 2014 11:09 am

Google[x] has one of these projects: Makani.
http://www.google.com/makani/

Nigel in Waterloo
August 14, 2014 11:11 am

Wouldn’t these rather long tethers pose a problem for airplanes?

Latitude
August 14, 2014 11:15 am

that’s a great idea…I can’t think of anything that could go wrong (snark)

Bill Marsh
Editor
August 14, 2014 11:16 am

So, if they start sucking all this energy out of the jet streams, wouldn’t that affect the wind pattern and subsequently the weather, if not directly beneath the turbines, but ‘downstream’, possibly in other countries? I can see ‘weather wars’ with claims that our high level wind devices are ‘robbing’ 3rd world countries of wind energy and suing climate change that the 3rd world country would want to be compensated for.

August 14, 2014 11:18 am

The utility of surface based wind turbines suffers severely from the intermittent nature of wind power. Now magnify that to a tethered balloon array of hundreds of these things in Oklahoma-Arkansas when the spring-summer storms roll through. The scale of tethered floating wind turbines to generate viable levels of Megawatts is absurd.
Further more, helium supplies are already facing future shortages.
This approach is absolutely moronic for so many reasons. But hey, rent seekers are always up for a government handout.

August 14, 2014 11:19 am

Perfect. We could use these to power Space Elevators.

Frank K.
August 14, 2014 11:20 am

In other news, hurricanes can be harnessed as a domestic energy source, according Murray J. Fishbine of NCAR. “Extracting the energy will be a little tricky.” said Fishbine, “but hurricanes are a HUGE source of clean energy!”
/sarc

August 14, 2014 11:20 am

Once more with feeling (and links).
Perfect We could use these to power Space Elevators.

milodonharlani
August 14, 2014 11:24 am
Flydlbee
August 14, 2014 11:24 am

This would be vehemently opposed by most of the aviation community; the cable connecting these devices to the ground would be lethal to aircraft.

Jim G
August 14, 2014 11:27 am

Why not just land some fusion generators on the Sun and beam the energy down to Earth? You’re thinking we cannot land on the Sun, but maybe we could go at night.

Curious George
August 14, 2014 11:28 am

Get energy from ocean waves – and you will also limit erosion. NCAR must be desperate to get a clean energy to run their climate models on their Yellowstone supercomputer.

mark wagner
August 14, 2014 11:28 am

Plus, I imagine that hoisting the necessary power and control cables would significantly increase the lifting capacity, in weight, size and complexity.
And what happens when all that crashes to the ground somewhere?

dp
August 14, 2014 11:39 am

Let us know when they put one up over the Hamptons. If it’s good enough for them it’s good enough for me.

john robertson
August 14, 2014 11:40 am

This from the same geniuses who brought us the Precautionary Principle.
Wylie E Coyote, super genius.
Maybe the proper response is to invite them to go fly a kite?

August 14, 2014 11:40 am

These renewable-energy-at-any-cost” guys are driven by a Chicken Little “the sky is falling” view of the environment. Except they see nothing wrong with hanging a ton of electrical generation equipment in tethered balloons at high altitude to be subjected to low level turbulence and mechanical failure. With this plan the sky may not fall, but large heavy object they put in it certainly will fall.
Their view of risk can only be described as perverse.
Let us also consider limited resources. There isn’t enough helium in the world to float a fraction of the balloons to make a dent in electricity needs. Helium is too valuable to cryogenics for this idiocy anyway. So lets seem them do their testing with plentiful hydrogen. Then we enroll them in the Darwin Awards competition.

DD More
August 14, 2014 11:41 am

milodonharlani says: August 14, 2014 at 11:24 am
Princeton Plasma Physics Lab:
Had a professor who’s son in law was working on the Princeton tokamak project, but that was 1978. And from your posting – “The facility is designed to produce 500 million watts of fusion power for at least 400 seconds by the late 2020s to demonstrate the feasibility of fusion as a source of energy.”
Just 20 more years.
The team is now looking for additional funding to provide a more complete picture of the potential of higher-level winds.
The growing industry now includes more than 20 startups worldwide, exploring various designs for devices that could be tethered to ground stations and then raised or lowered to capture the most suitable winds at any point in time.

Community funding for private profit.

August 14, 2014 11:42 am

The question none of these projects ever asks: how much does the cable weigh?

Stephen Richards
August 14, 2014 11:42 am

IDIOTS the lot of them!

GnomePirate
August 14, 2014 11:42 am

Bill Marsh – yes! I had the same thought… Maybe not in the sense of wars, but regarding entire systems. I’m just a layman, so someone let me know if I’ve got it wrong.
My understanding of the Law of the Conservation of Energy is that energy is neither created nor destroyed, but only changes form. Technically, then, any electrical power “generated” by wind or water turbines hasn’t really been generated, but rather mechanically removed from one system and transferred to a different one – converted from one form into another.
Do we know:
…what happens when energy is removed from wind currents? Does the wind slow? Cool? Both?
…what happens when energy is removed from oceanic currents? Do the currents slow, or the waters cool (or both)?
…what happens when energy is removed from tidal motion? Do the tides slacken or the water cool (or both)?
Do any of these studies consider what will happen system-wide if wind farms (wherever they are positioned) gradually, maybe even imperceptibly, slow down or cool the wind? Has anyone calculated what will happen in the ocean if the currents slow down or cool down because of massive submarine turbine farms? Has anyone projected what the effect will be if tides slacken?

Eustace Cranch
August 14, 2014 11:43 am

Sure, what could go wrong?
I can’t think of a thing. Not a thing…

milodonharlani
August 14, 2014 11:45 am

mark wagner says:
August 14, 2014 at 11:28 am
To avoid disastrous crashes on land & limit hazard to low altitude aviation, maybe they’d all go in the tropical oceans, attached to ships which could serve as artificial tax haven islands. Maybe housing the next three billion people before population stabilizes.
Let’s see. At ten thousand people per ship, that’s 300,000 ships. With a mile between ships, for 300,000 miles, divided by about 15,000 nautical miles of unobstructed equatorial waters, there would have to be 20 ranks of them on either side of the equator. Might need even greater separation to keep the kites from getting entangled & stealing each others’ wind. Obviously have to fly at different altitudes.
I’m thinking fusion. Might even be more cost effective.

milodonharlani
August 14, 2014 11:47 am

DD More says:
August 14, 2014 at 11:41 am
You’re right that so far fusion has been like Pure Communism in the USSR, always 20 years in the future.
But unlike Communism, IMO fusion will eventually arrive, maybe just about the time humanity can most use it.

1 2 3 8