![Altaeros_Wind_Turbine_Wide[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/altaeros_wind_turbine_wide1.jpg?quality=83)
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.
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.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
oh wow, what a brilliant idea; life could never go on without this. I want one! where can i get one of those? i need it now, because i’m about to blow my…………………. out.
again pathetic. move on people, go for a walk in the woods or something.
Anth0ny:
High altitude wind is one of several impossible power generation schemes which repeatedly obtain research funding from governments. The two other most popular are hot rocks and underground coal gasification.
These schemes each have some similarity to an existing source of energy but promise to overcome a problem with the existing source. In each case the snake-oil salesmen promote the potential to overcome an existing problem, and in the case of high altitude wind the potential is said to be a solution to the problem of wind power being intermittent. But the problems of the ‘solution’ are not obvious to people who lack numeracy; e.g. politicians. And in the case of high altitude wind the main problem is lack of any materials – or ideas for methods – capable of providing the electricity cables.
Politicians often fund studies on paper or as physical trials of impossible power generatyion schemes. Indeed, such trials are commonly made when the politicians know a scheme won’t work; for example, hot rocks trials were conducted as an excuse for the then ongoing closure of the British coal industry.
Richard
Somebody called these schemes “pie in the sky” dreams.
What goes up, must…….
(Hopefully only the schemers will be the ones looking up when that happens.8-)
But….”If wishes were horses, beggars would ride”.
So there’s that.
I saw something about this on TV years ago. A project in Holland. They had ‘clever’ kites that went up like kites but came down like planes, generating electricity on the way up. I’m not sure if this link is about that particular project, but it did seem feasible
http://phys.org/news/2013-07-delft-professor-kites-high-renewable.html
richardscourtney says:
August 14, 2014 at 1:40 pm
.
“hot rocks”
..
Hellisheidi Power Station Iceland 303 MW
Navy Geothermal Plant United States 270 MW
Malitbog Geothermal Power Station Philippines 233 MW
Wayang Windu Geothermal Power Station Indonesia 227 MW
Cerro Prieto Geothermal Power Station II Mexico 220 MW
Cerro Prieto Geothermal Power Station III Mexico 220 MW
Darajat Power Station II, III Indonesia 200 MW
Salton Sea Power Station United States 185 MW
Cerro Prieto Geothermal Power Station I Mexico 180 MW
Mahanagdong Power Station Philippines 180 MW
Mount Salak Indonesia 180 MW
Calistoga Power Station United States 176 MW
Te Mihi Power Station New Zealand 166 MW
Wairakei Power Station New Zealand 157 MW
Jermaghbyur Geothermal Power Plant Armenia 150 MW
Reykjanes Power Station Iceland 150 MW
Kamojang Geothermal Power Plant I, II, III Indonesia 140 MW
The Geysers 13 United States 138 MW
Nga Awa Purua Power Station New Zealand 132 MW
Upper Mahiao Power Station Philippines 125 MW
Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Station Iceland 120 MW
Valle Secolo power station Italy 120 MW
…
want more?
Malc:
re your post at August 14, 2014 at 1:55 pm.
Yes, there are many variations of the high altitude wind idea and – as you say – several “seem feasible”. But none are useful until the problem of getting the power down is overcome and there are no materials or ideas for a suitable power cable.
As I said in my post at August 14, 2014 at 1:40 pm,
“High altitude wind is one of several impossible power generation schemes which repeatedly obtain research funding from governments. The two other most popular are hot rocks and underground coal gasification.”
Richard
There’s a lot of cattle producing methane. If only we could harness that power source. Now that really would be capturing low level wind!
Didn’t Ben Franklin first use a kite to gather electricity?
At first blush, it doesn’t sound all that bad… But flying wind tunnel / windmills (as depicted in the picture) seem like giant flying death traps. And someone mentioned the cable — It would likely be steel, and if the thing was working properly, charged with 10,000 volts or some huge amount, to efficiently transfer the power to the ground for collecting, adjustment, and transmission to someplace it can be used.
And speaking of the giant flying wind tunnels of doom overhead at 10,000 feet attached to giant steel cables (which are packing 10,000 volts) — surely government regulations would sensibly require these installations (arrays of these flying wind tunnels of doom) to be spaced 10,000 feet apart or so (so the cables can’t tangle), and also severely limit what types of things can be built in the “crash zone” (like I don’t know, refineries, nuke plants, hospitals, dog houses, etc)
Anyways — putting enough of these things together to power a city or something might end up looking like there is a menacing invasion of nazi zeppelins hovering just outside of town. (And I’d dare you to take a drive through the wasteland under the swarm!)
Edward Richardson:
At August 14, 2014 at 1:40 pm I wrote
At August 14, 2014 at 2:03 pm you have replied by demonstrating the truth of my statements with regard to hot rocks.
Geothermal power is useful and effective where it is possible. Iceland obtains most of its energy from geothermal power. But the problem with geothermal energy is that it is only obtainable in a few locations. Hot rocks is said to overcome this problem by obtaining heat from slightly heated rock formations which exist in very many places.
Your post attempts snake-oil selling by confusing geothermal and hot rocks in precisely the manner I mentioned in my post. Indeed, you list geothermal power stations and pretend they are hot rocks schemes.
In hot rocks two (or more) holes are bored into the ground. The strata of the hot rock is cracked between the holes and water is pumped down one hole so it flows through the cracks and returns up the other hole. Thus, the water is heated by the hot rock. But the strata settles to close the cracks. This can be reduced by adding sand to the water so it jams open the cracks, but this only reduces the rate of settling. More cracks have to be created to maintain water flow. Before long more energy is expended in cracking rock than is obtained as heat from the rock because hot rocks don’t supply much heat.
Understanding of this balance between energy expenditure and energy obtained requires adequate numeracy. And, as I said,
“But the problems of the ‘solution’ are not obvious to people who lack numeracy; e.g. politicians.”
So, I thank you for your post because it provides a clear demonstration for any who may have doubted what I wrote.
Richard
If gaseous winds can save us we are going to be just fine.
richardscourtney says:
August 14, 2014 at 2:24 pm
pretend they are hot rocks schemes.””
..
No need to “pretend” all of the geothermal plants listed work by means of “hot rocks”
Today’s wind farms are bad enough, but at the scale envisaged would there be an impact on Earth’s rotation? Muck around with that at your peril!
Hey I had this idea years ago…when I was six, maybe seven.
“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.”
This concept was discussed years ago on physics forms, where a bunch of greenies hang out. The jet stream moves around, so even if you could capture the wind today; tomorrow it would be somewhere else. The same applies to LLJ’s..
http://www.theweatherprediction.com/severe/llj/
The thing that really gets me about this is that the people on the other side of this
argument seem to endorse only those forms of energy that are either impractical
or insane.
Let us say we float millions of these devices at some desired altitude. How do we
get the power back to Earth? In a sane world, that would end the idea that this
approach would work, but in a world where the greenies believe that an industrial
economy can be powered by unicorn farts, this concept will still be around in
50 years.
Electricity is not the only energy form there is and it doesn’t meet the needs of diverse applications. Moving it around is a problem. Electricity won’t move us & our stuff across great the distances that have to be traveled. Electricity can not yet match the energy density of gasoline or diesel or jet fuel. One dimensional thinking isn’t going to solve energy’s multi-dimensional challenges.
One has to love these large-scale, hair-brained schemes as energy solutions. Energy abounds–we just need “free” machines to tap it.
Edward Richardson says:
August 14, 2014 at 2:28 pm
Actually, geothermal power works by means of hot water, not hot rocks. The hot water might heat the rocks through which it passes, but the rocks themselves don’t need to be particularly hot for hot water from the earth to be used in steam generators or some other method for conversion to electricity or as a direct heating method.
milodonharlani says:
August 14, 2014 at 2:59 pm
“not hot rocks. ”
…
The source of the heat for geothermal energy is the rock..
The water carries the heat up from the rocks to the surface.
You can view “hot rock” if you travel to Hawaii and see Kīlauea.
The rock is so hot, it is fluid.
Yoking the katabatic winds at the antarctic coasts… maybe. Probably the best place on Earth to make a go of wind power.
How to access and transmit power to the ground isn’t difficult:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/03/kitegen-reveals-some-progress-with-3.html
The kite is anchored to the ground via a high strength polymer cable, the cable from the kite moving in orbit of the ground station turns a turbine. But this would block off huge swaths of airspace, especially if each kite is floating at 1500+ meters up.
If someone could make unsubsidized money from this idea, it will fly. Then we all profit. If not, it’s a tax-payer funded scam. Simple.
I’d like to see how such a device would stand up to a severe thunderstorm (would likely be hit by a few every year).
Edward Richardson says:
August 14, 2014 at 3:05 pm
I don’t have to go to Hawaii. I’m surrounded by geothermal power & hot springs here in Oregon & where I live in Chile, although I used to live in Hawaii.
Molten magma isn’t “rock”. It’s made out of some of the same materials as rocks, but in geology, to be a rock, you have to be solid.
milodonharlani says:
August 14, 2014 at 3:15 pm
..
If you wish to split hairs about the definition of molten rock, be my guest. But that does not change the fact that the heat energy for geothermal energy, and hot springs comes from “hot rock”
PS…here’s a diagram of Hellisheiði
…..
The Smiley face is the “hot rock”
http://www.or.is/vinnsluras/