Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Cool turbine video

Expand Messages
  • Jay Ring
    I hope this hasn t already been posted :) The video is neat. Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there is still a lot more they
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.

      Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
      is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
      evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.

      http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatically-increase-generation-efficien/
    • kconlin@solarcraft.net
      Thank you for your message. Solarcraft is closed for the holidays until Monday January 5. I will get back to you then. If this matter is extremely urgent,
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Thank you for your message. Solarcraft is closed for the holidays until Monday January 5. I will get back to you then.

        If this matter is extremely urgent, please call or email Suzette Walsh at 832-894-9190, swalsh@....

        Merry Christmas and Happy New Year,

        Kevin Conlin
      • Gary Beck
        if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big additonal drag and
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
        • 0 Attachment

          if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big additonal drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.

           

          From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jay Ring
          Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
          To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video

           

          I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.

          Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
          is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
          evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.

          http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatically-increase-generation-efficien/

        • Jay Ring
          The diameter is smaller; that is the whole point of this design. Drag is an increasing function of extracted energy. This a physical consequence of extracting
          Message 4 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            The diameter is smaller; that is the whole point of this design.

            Drag is an increasing function of extracted energy. This a physical
            consequence of extracting energy.

            The design is (claimed to be) self aligning, so lateral loads are
            minimal.

            I don't have any idea what the weight the cowling is, but it looks
            like it would be a lot less, if the scale in the video is to believed.

            I'm still a little more interested in the vertical-axis designs (as a
            personal interest), but it's hard to imagine beating the efficiency of
            the type of turbine this is based on. At least with current technology.





            --- In hreg@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Beck" <eco@...> wrote:
            >
            > if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the
            > cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big
            > additonal drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.
            >
            >
            >
            > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            > Jay Ring
            > Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
            > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video
            >
            >
            >
            > I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.
            >
            > Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
            > is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
            > evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.
            >
            > http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatica
            > lly-increase-generation-efficien/
            >
          • Kevin Conlin
            That link is not working for me, am I missing something? I get an automobile news page? Kevin Conlin Solarcraft, Inc. 4007-C Greenbriar Drive Stafford, TX
            Message 5 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
            • 0 Attachment

              That link is not working for me, am I missing something?  I get an automobile news page?

               

              Kevin Conlin

              Solarcraft, Inc.

              4007-C Greenbriar Drive

              Stafford, TX 77477

              Local (281) 340-1224

              Toll Free (877) 340-1224

              Fax (281) 340-1230

              Cell (281) 960-8979

              kconlin@...

              www.solarcraft.net

               


              From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jay Ring
              Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:57 AM
              To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [hreg] Re: Cool turbine video

               

              The diameter is smaller; that is the whole point of this design.

              Drag is an increasing function of extracted energy. This a physical
              consequence of extracting energy.

              The design is (claimed to be) self aligning, so lateral loads are
              minimal.

              I don't have any idea what the weight the cowling is, but it looks
              like it would be a lot less, if the scale in the video is to believed.

              I'm still a little more interested in the vertical-axis designs (as a
              personal interest), but it's hard to imagine beating the efficiency of
              the type of turbine this is based on. At least with current technology.

              --- In hreg@yahoogroups. com, "Gary Beck" <eco@...> wrote:

              >
              > if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the
              > cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big
              > additonal drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.
              >
              >
              >
              > From: hreg@yahoogroups. com
              [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of
              > Jay Ring
              > Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
              > To: hreg@yahoogroups. com
              > Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video
              >
              >
              >
              > I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.
              >
              > Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
              > is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
              > evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.
              >
              >
              href="http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatica">http://www.autoblog green.com/ 2008/12/31/ new-wind- turbine-could- dramatica
              > lly-increase- generation- efficien/
              >

            • Kevin Conlin
              I agree. After viewing the video, many of the facts they present aren t. I don t see any practical way the concept can be commercialized. The video sounds
              Message 6 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
              • 0 Attachment

                I agree.  After viewing the video, many of the “facts” they present aren’t. I don’t see any practical way the concept can be commercialized.  The video sounds as if the current technology is hopelessly outdated, when in fact it works quite well and is cost competitive with conventional power generation.  For example, the reason current turbines are located away from populated areas isn’t because the turbines explode as depicted, but simply that’s where the best wind is.

                 

                Given that renewables are “hot” right now, there is never a shortage of people trying to raise funding with often misleading “information”. Gary is right, they ignore the huge cost of their extra hardware, or the massive tower that would be required to support it. They also ignore that transportation of the blades is not really a big deal, but they would have you believe it is near impossible, and it is much cheaper to assemble a complex shroud in mid air than it is to hang a turbine blade.

                 

                As the group curmudgeon, I don’t believe the design is practical on a large scale.

                 

                Kevin Conlin

                Solarcraft, Inc.

                4007-C Greenbriar Drive

                Stafford, TX 77477

                Local (281) 340-1224

                Toll Free (877) 340-1224

                Fax (281) 340-1230

                Cell (281) 960-8979

                kconlin@...

                www.solarcraft.net

                 


                From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary Beck
                Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:38 AM
                To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [hreg] Cool turbine video

                 

                if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big additonal drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.

                 

                From: hreg@yahoogroups. com [mailto:hreg@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Jay Ring
                Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
                To: hreg@yahoogroups. com
                Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video

                 

                I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.

                Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
                is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
                evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.

                http://www.autoblog green.com/ 2008/12/31/ new-wind- turbine-could- dramatically- increase- generation- efficien/

              • Jay Ring
                You agree? With what? The cowl looks smaller and the structure is self-aligning so drag should be a non-issue. Did I miss something? I don t know if you can
                Message 7 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  You agree? With what? The cowl looks smaller and the structure is
                  self-aligning so drag should be a non-issue. Did I miss something?

                  I don't know if you can get more skeptical than I am; I embrace the
                  term with pride! That is my intellectual starting point.

                  However - "curmudgeon", as you no doubt know, means old, stubborn, and
                  set in their ways. Therefore, all progress, technological or
                  otherwise, depends on ignoring them! :)

                  I don't see any problem commercializing them, other than incurring
                  another round of start up costs (drawings, fixtures, molds, tooling).
                  Nothing in the design (that I can see) is difficult to fabricate.

                  I could be wrong, but I imagine the cowl will be constructed on the
                  ground and then hoisted onto the support, as opposed to constructed in
                  mid air.

                  I am not sure what makes you think there will be a huge cost for extra
                  hardware. The massive tower you are worried about is required for any
                  wind turbine. They already build them and they are pretty good at it.

                  Component count wise, it may have more sub-components, but they are
                  smaller and should be easier to fabricate without a custom fabrication
                  facility. I doubt either of us can give a really accurate per-unit
                  cost on either one. However, I would guess the cost would be within a
                  factor of three.

                  Current technology isn't that bad, I don't think the tone of the video
                  was that at all. That certainly doesn't mean it can't be improved
                  though. What we have now is certainly not the best that is possible.
                  Turbines are more efficient than propellers. That is why we use them
                  on virtually every other fluid-flow design (water, steam, rocket). I
                  imagine this will eventually work it's way into wind, even if this
                  exact project is not the one to develop it.

                  Have a good one!





                  --- In hreg@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Conlin" <kconlin@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I agree. After viewing the video, many of the "facts" they present
                  aren't.
                  > I don't see any practical way the concept can be commercialized.
                  The video
                  > sounds as if the current technology is hopelessly outdated, when in
                  fact it
                  > works quite well and is cost competitive with conventional power
                  generation.
                  > For example, the reason current turbines are located away from populated
                  > areas isn't because the turbines explode as depicted, but simply that's
                  > where the best wind is.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Given that renewables are "hot" right now, there is never a shortage of
                  > people trying to raise funding with often misleading "information".
                  Gary is
                  > right, they ignore the huge cost of their extra hardware, or the massive
                  > tower that would be required to support it. They also ignore that
                  > transportation of the blades is not really a big deal, but they
                  would have
                  > you believe it is near impossible, and it is much cheaper to assemble a
                  > complex shroud in mid air than it is to hang a turbine blade.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > As the group curmudgeon, I don't believe the design is practical on
                  a large
                  > scale.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Kevin Conlin
                  >
                  > Solarcraft, Inc.
                  >
                  > 4007-C Greenbriar Drive
                  >
                  > Stafford, TX 77477
                  >
                  > Local (281) 340-1224
                  >
                  > Toll Free (877) 340-1224
                  >
                  > Fax (281) 340-1230
                  >
                  > Cell (281) 960-8979
                  >
                  > kconlin@...
                  >
                  > www.solarcraft.net
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > _____
                  >
                  > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                  Of Gary
                  > Beck
                  > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:38 AM
                  > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: RE: [hreg] Cool turbine video
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the
                  > cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big
                  additonal
                  > drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                  Of Jay
                  > Ring
                  > Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
                  > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.
                  >
                  > Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
                  > is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
                  > evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.
                  >
                  > http://www.autoblog
                  >
                  <http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatically
                  > -increase-generation-efficien/>
                  >
                  green.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatically-increase-generation
                  > -efficien/
                  >
                • Shafer, Mark B
                  Thanks Jay for your input. The safety features are a big selling point. Wind farms have to go through environmental studies to show there is no adverse effect
                  Message 8 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment

                    Thanks Jay for your input. 

                     

                    The safety features are a big selling point.  Wind farms have to go through environmental studies to show there is no adverse effect on migratory birds – if this is less threatening to birds – installation might be expedited. 

                     

                    Easier transport is good.

                     

                    Assembling on the ground will save money. 

                     

                    I’ve got a windy site already – I’d love to see a “Homeowners” version.

                     

                     

                     

                    From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jay Ring
                    Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:21 PM
                    To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [hreg] Re: Cool turbine video

                     

                    You agree? With what? The cowl looks smaller and the structure is
                    self-aligning so drag should be a non-issue. Did I miss something?

                    I don't know if you can get more skeptical than I am; I embrace the
                    term with pride! That is my intellectual starting point.

                    However - "curmudgeon", as you no doubt know, means old, stubborn, and
                    set in their ways. Therefore, all progress, technological or
                    otherwise, depends on ignoring them! :)

                    I don't see any problem commercializing them, other than incurring
                    another round of start up costs (drawings, fixtures, molds, tooling).
                    Nothing in the design (that I can see) is difficult to fabricate.

                    I could be wrong, but I imagine the cowl will be constructed on the
                    ground and then hoisted onto the support, as opposed to constructed in
                    mid air.

                    I am not sure what makes you think there will be a huge cost for extra
                    hardware. The massive tower you are worried about is required for any
                    wind turbine. They already build them and they are pretty good at it.

                    Component count wise, it may have more sub-components, but they are
                    smaller and should be easier to fabricate without a custom fabrication
                    facility. I doubt either of us can give a really accurate per-unit
                    cost on either one. However, I would guess the cost would be within a
                    factor of three.

                    Current technology isn't that bad, I don't think the tone of the video
                    was that at all. That certainly doesn't mean it can't be improved
                    though. What we have now is certainly not the best that is possible.
                    Turbines are more efficient than propellers. That is why we use them
                    on virtually every other fluid-flow design (water, steam, rocket). I
                    imagine this will eventually work it's way into wind, even if this
                    exact project is not the one to develop it.

                    Have a good one!

                    --- In hreg@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Conlin" <kconlin@...> wrote:

                    >
                    > I agree. After viewing the video, many of the "facts" they
                    present
                    aren't.
                    > I don't see any practical way the concept can be commercialized.
                    The video
                    > sounds as if the current technology is hopelessly outdated, when in
                    fact it
                    > works quite well and is cost competitive with conventional power
                    generation.
                    > For example, the reason current turbines are located away from populated
                    > areas isn't because the turbines explode as depicted, but simply that's
                    > where the best wind is.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Given that renewables are "hot" right now, there is never a
                    shortage of
                    > people trying to raise funding with often misleading "information".
                    Gary is
                    > right, they ignore the huge cost of their extra hardware, or the massive
                    > tower that would be required to support it. They also ignore that
                    > transportation of the blades is not really a big deal, but they
                    would have
                    > you believe it is near impossible, and it is much cheaper to assemble a
                    > complex shroud in mid air than it is to hang a turbine blade.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > As the group curmudgeon, I don't believe the design is practical on
                    a large
                    > scale.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Kevin Conlin
                    >
                    > Solarcraft, Inc.
                    >
                    > 4007-C Greenbriar Drive
                    >
                    > Stafford, TX 77477
                    >
                    > Local (281) 340-1224
                    >
                    > Toll Free (877) 340-1224
                    >
                    > Fax (281) 340-1230
                    >
                    > Cell (281) 960-8979
                    >
                    > kconlin@...
                    >
                    > www.solarcraft.net
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > _____
                    >
                    > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                    Of Gary
                    > Beck
                    > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:38 AM
                    > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: RE: [hreg] Cool turbine video
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the
                    > cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big
                    additonal
                    > drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                    Of Jay
                    > Ring
                    > Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
                    > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.
                    >
                    > Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
                    > is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
                    > evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.
                    >
                    > http://www.autoblog
                    >
                    <http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatically
                    > -increase-generation-efficien/>
                    >
                    green.com/2008/12/31/new-wind-turbine-could-dramatically-increase-generation
                    > -efficien/
                    >

                  • Kevin Conlin
                    Please see my replies below.. Kevin Conlin Solarcraft, Inc. 4007-C Greenbriar Drive Stafford, TX 77477 Local (281) 340-1224 Toll Free (877) 340-1224 Fax (281)
                    Message 9 of 9 , Jan 5, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment

                      Please see my replies below….

                       

                      Kevin Conlin

                      Solarcraft, Inc.

                      4007-C Greenbriar Drive

                      Stafford, TX 77477

                      Local (281) 340-1224

                      Toll Free (877) 340-1224

                      Fax (281) 340-1230

                      Cell (281) 960-8979

                      kconlin@...

                      www.solarcraft.net

                       


                      From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jay Ring
                      Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:21 PM
                      To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [hreg] Re: Cool turbine video

                       

                      You agree? With what? The cowl looks smaller and the structure is
                      self-aligning so drag should be a non-issue. Did I miss something? I agree with Gary ’s comments, the video did not address the key issues of scaling the technology.  It addressed the alleged shortcomings of current turbine designs, but not the potential pitfalls of theirs.  Try putting a cowl around a 5MW turbine, which is the current generation.

                      I don't know if you can get more skeptical than I am; I embrace the
                      term with pride! That is my intellectual starting point. Good for you.

                      However - "curmudgeon" , as you no doubt know, means old, stubborn, and
                      set in their ways. Therefore, all progress, technological or
                      otherwise, depends on ignoring them! :) That’s your interpretation. The humorous label is mine because I’ve been around the solar industry for over 30 years, and 95% of the supposed technological advances I have seen promoted for both wind and solar did not come to pass for practical reasons. Considering my company introduced several new products last year that I designed that were very successful, and I have several patents pending, I don’t think it’s accurate to label me as ignoring or opposing advancing technology. You may also review the article I wrote that was just published in Remote magazine, and maybe download the paper I presented last year at the Entelec conference before you jump to that conclusion. Why don’t you peruse my website and let me know what solar company does a better job of packaging industrial, stand alone systems than we do. www.solarcraft.net

                      I don't see any problem commercializing them, other than incurring
                      another round of start up costs (drawings, fixtures, molds, tooling).
                      Nothing in the design (that I can see) is difficult to fabricate. I don’t agree.

                      I could be wrong, but I imagine the cowl will be constructed on the
                      ground and then hoisted onto the support, as opposed to constructed in
                      mid air.

                      I am not sure what makes you think there will be a huge cost for extra
                      hardware. The massive tower you are worried about is required for any
                      wind turbine. They already build them and they are pretty good at it. No, the design that was proposed has a much greater mass than just turbine blades, and if it is in fact capturing more wind, then the dynamic loads on the structure will be greater as well. The aperture of the cowl still has to capture the same amount of wind or more. It has two stage vanes as well as a multi bladed turbine and all the other ancillary hardware inside, and a 5MW generator will still require all of it’s ancillary hardware, power conditioning electronics, etc…those costs stay the same.  The computer graphics totally ignored the actual mechanical structures that would be required to structurally support such a large system.

                      Component count wise, it may have more sub-components, but they are
                      smaller and should be easier to fabricate without a custom fabrication
                      facility. I doubt either of us can give a really accurate per-unit
                      cost on either one. However, I would guess the cost would be within a
                      factor of three. Those cowl and vane designs are hugely custom, and anyone who thinks they can be easily fabricated in any metal shop will be proven wrong. 3X the number of parts for a lower cost? Don’t think so.

                      Current technology isn't that bad, I don't think the tone of the video
                      was that at all. I strongly disagree on that point, the limitations of current technology were overstated and exaggerated. That certainly doesn't mean it can't be improved
                      though. What we have now is certainly not the best that is possible.
                      Turbines are more efficient than propellers. That is why we use them
                      on virtually every other fluid-flow design (water, steam, rocket). I
                      imagine this will eventually work it's way into wind, even if this
                      exact project is not the one to develop it. What works at a small scale and high speed isn’t necessarily easy to scale up, and multiple small turbines are necessarily cheaper than one big one. The opposite is true because your fixed costs, such as high voltage infrastructure, are still the same.

                      It’s a sure thing that turbine technology will continue to improve, and a set of turbines was recently erected in Dubai that uses a wedge shaped building to help direct the wind into the turbines, but it remains to be seen if the improved performance justified the extra costs. The concept would be better adapted to tidal and river flow power generation in my opinion.

                      Have a good one!

                      --- In hreg@yahoogroups. com, "Kevin Conlin" <kconlin@... > wrote:

                      >
                      > I agree. After viewing the video, many of the "facts" they
                      present
                      aren't.
                      > I don't see any practical way the concept can be commercialized.
                      The video
                      > sounds as if the current technology is hopelessly outdated, when in
                      fact it
                      > works quite well and is cost competitive with conventional power
                      generation.
                      > For example, the reason current turbines are located away from populated
                      > areas isn't because the turbines explode as depicted, but simply that's
                      > where the best wind is.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Given that renewables are "hot" right now, there is never a
                      shortage of
                      > people trying to raise funding with often misleading "information" .
                      Gary is
                      > right, they ignore the huge cost of their extra hardware, or the massive
                      > tower that would be required to support it. They also ignore that
                      > transportation of the blades is not really a big deal, but they
                      would have
                      > you believe it is near impossible, and it is much cheaper to assemble a
                      > complex shroud in mid air than it is to hang a turbine blade.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > As the group curmudgeon, I don't believe the design is practical on
                      a large
                      > scale.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Kevin Conlin
                      >
                      > Solarcraft, Inc.
                      >
                      > 4007-C Greenbriar Drive
                      >
                      > Stafford ,
                      w:st="on">TX 77477
                      >
                      > Local (281) 340-1224
                      >
                      > Toll Free (877) 340-1224
                      >
                      > Fax (281) 340-1230
                      >
                      > Cell (281) 960-8979
                      >
                      > kconlin@...
                      >
                      > www.solarcraft. net
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > _____
                      >
                      > From: hreg@yahoogroups. com
                      [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf
                      Of Gary
                      > Beck
                      > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:38 AM
                      > To: hreg@yahoogroups. com
                      > Subject: RE: [hreg] Cool turbine video
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > if this is intended for the blade diameter of a 2 MW wind turbine, the
                      > cowling would need to be just huge. It would add weight plus big
                      additonal
                      > drag and lateral wind loads to the support structure.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > From: hreg@yahoogroups. com
                      [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf
                      Of Jay
                      > Ring
                      > Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 8:03 PM
                      > To: hreg@yahoogroups. com
                      > Subject: [hreg] Cool turbine video
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > I hope this hasn't already been posted :) The video is neat.
                      >
                      > Turbine based design seems a lot better to me , although I think there
                      > is still a lot more they can do with this. I think it will follow the
                      > evolution of the airplane as the industry matures.
                      >
                      > http://www.autoblog
                      >
                      <http://www.autoblog green.com/ 2008/12/31/ new-wind- turbine-could- dramatically
                      > -increase-generatio n-efficien/ >
                      >
                      green.com/2008/ 12/31/new- wind-turbine- could-dramatical ly-increase- generation
                      > -efficien/
                      >

                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.