Thank you for your comments. But, I don't want anything like a 10
foot diameter wind turbine. That would be Much too big and
unnecessary. I do want something bigger than the conventional 1.2
meter ones because I want more power and that means more diameter and
the Whisper is the best bet at 2.1 meters/7 feet.

That is the biggest it is sensible to be able to handle.

And, I don't want to build the thing myself, either!

And I don't want solar panels. They're too easy. And you have to
keep moving them round with the sun. Yes, I know you can get all
kinds of tortuously complicated gubbins and electronics that moves it
round on a motor with the sun, but that is much, much too complex.

So, as nobody has come up with any valid reasons why I should not put
a Whisper on my roof, that is what I'm going to do.

Peter

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 12:21:11 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Thank you for your comments. But, I don't want anything like a 10
foot diameter wind turbine. That would be Much too big and
unnecessary. I do want something bigger than the conventional 1.2
meter ones because I want more power and that means more diameter and
the Whisper is the best bet at 2.1 meters/7 feet.

That is the biggest it is sensible to be able to handle.

And, I don't want to build the thing myself, either!

And I don't want solar panels. They're too easy. And you have to
keep moving them round with the sun. Yes, I know you can get all
kinds of tortuously complicated gubbins and electronics that moves it
round on a motor with the sun, but that is much, much too complex.

So, as nobody has come up with any valid reasons why I should not put
a Whisper on my roof, that is what I'm going to do.

Peter

http://www.scoraigwind.com/citywinds/index.htm

In article 5cc23ec8-73c8-47f4-84ed-3f2bf00f7c31
@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com, says...
Thank you for your comments. But, I don't want anything like a 10
foot diameter wind turbine. That would be Much too big and
unnecessary. I do want something bigger than the conventional 1.2
meter ones because I want more power and that means more diameter and
the Whisper is the best bet at 2.1 meters/7 feet.

That is the biggest it is sensible to be able to handle.

And, I don't want to build the thing myself, either!

And I don't want solar panels. They're too easy. And you have to
keep moving them round with the sun. Yes, I know you can get all
kinds of tortuously complicated gubbins and electronics that moves it
round on a motor with the sun, but that is much, much too complex.

So, as nobody has come up with any valid reasons why I should not put
a Whisper on my roof, that is what I'm going to do.

Whatever little you are getting now, you'll get very little extra with
the larger turbine blade diameter. IMO, its a bad idea, unless you are
on top of a high aqueduct... Don't waste your money, you're too close to
the ground for much useful wind power.

I suggest looking at www.cat.org.uk, www.scoraigwind.com/rooftop.html,
etc. You'd be better off with www.whispergen.com or installing solar
water heaters to look after that part of your energy consumption. See
www.navitron.org.uk/category.php?catID=71

--
John W
To mail me replace the obvious with co.uk twice

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 23:02:38 +0100, John Weston
wrote:

Whatever little you are getting now, you'll get very little extra with
the larger turbine blade diameter.

Output varies with the square of the diameter. Three times as much is
what you get with the larger unit. To digress a bit the state of Iowa
gets five percent on its juice from wind, compared to one per cent
nationally. The common 2 MW 150 foot rotor ones would equal a thirty
barrel a day oil well. That is if the wind always blew. Chicago has
the nerve to call itself the windy city, but Des Moines is windier.

Casady

In article ,
says...

Output varies with the square of the diameter. Three times as much is
what you get with the larger unit. To digress a bit the state of Iowa
gets five percent on its juice from wind, compared to one per cent
nationally. The common 2 MW 150 foot rotor ones would equal a thirty
barrel a day oil well. That is if the wind always blew. Chicago has
the nerve to call itself the windy city, but Des Moines is windier.

Ah but - the OP is most likely on a short mast, down amongst the surface
turbulance - He's on a canal mooring somewhere and can't install
anything substantial. Yes, he'll see increased output but will it ever
recover it's increased cost of ownership? Typical boat installations
can work since they are providing power replacement for the relatively
small loads of nav lights and the like - but he's on a live-aboard...
As with any such installation, one has to do the power usage profile
calculations to see what is needed and look for the source that will
more than meet the need - and divide the marketing data by two to get
more realistic figures. As you may gather - I use motor generated power
on my sailing boat.

Whilst the UK has a good wind profile when compared to other European
countries, the similar large wind generators run by the electricity
supply companies are nowhere meeting their planned prerformance. The UK
will not meet it's 20% renewables commitment with the current solutions
so are in the throes of looking for alternatives. Practically all the
private rooftop installations to-date are so under-performing most have
been removed as not even generating enough power to cover that used by
the controlling electronics required for connection the the user's mains
supply.

--
John W
To mail me replace the obvious with co.uk twice

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:11:36 +0100, John Weston
wrote:

In article ,
says...

Output varies with the square of the diameter. Three times as much is
what you get with the larger unit. To digress a bit the state of Iowa
gets five percent on its juice from wind, compared to one per cent
nationally. The common 2 MW 150 foot rotor ones would equal a thirty
barrel a day oil well. That is if the wind always blew. Chicago has
the nerve to call itself the windy city, but Des Moines is windier.

Ah but - the OP is most likely on a short mast, down amongst the surface
turbulance - He's on a canal mooring somewhere and can't install
anything substantial. Yes, he'll see increased output but will it ever
recover it's increased cost of ownership? Typical boat installations
can work since they are providing power replacement for the relatively
small loads of nav lights and the like - but he's on a live-aboard...
As with any such installation, one has to do the power usage profile
calculations to see what is needed and look for the source that will
more than meet the need - and divide the marketing data by two to get
more realistic figures. As you may gather - I use motor generated power
on my sailing boat.

Whilst the UK has a good wind profile when compared to other European
countries, the similar large wind generators run by the electricity
supply companies are nowhere meeting their planned prerformance. The UK
will not meet it's 20% renewables commitment with the current solutions
so are in the throes of looking for alternatives. Practically all the
private rooftop installations to-date are so under-performing most have
been removed as not even generating enough power to cover that used by
the controlling electronics required for connection the the user's mains
supply.

Maybe Iowa is windier than GB but here we are putting up 2 MW units as
fast as we can build them, with several factories in the state. The
units seem to be the maximum size you can haul down the road in large
pieces. Cylindrical 50 000 lb sections of tower, as opposed to welding
it up from small plates on site. One piece blades, There doesn't seem
to be a downside. They aren't especially noisy or ugly, and don't take
up much space.

Casady

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:36:54 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

Maybe Iowa is windier than GB but here we are putting up 2 MW units as
fast as we can build them, with several factories in the state. The
units seem to be the maximum size you can haul down the road in large
pieces. Cylindrical 50 000 lb sections of tower, as opposed to welding
it up from small plates on site. One piece blades, There doesn't seem
to be a downside. They aren't especially noisy or ugly, and don't take
up much space.

I've seen the towers in Iowa, the ones near Dennison, and they are
impressive looking. Aparently there is a growing issue with power
distribution however:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/27/bu...em&oref=slogin

It isn't a problem if the energy is consumed close to where it is
produced but the best winds are in areas with low population density.