Wind Turbine Local Loop

Honey attracts more friends than vinegar... my name is John patterson and I live in central Kansas, in a small town called "Lindsborg" my energy blog is at Lindsborg.blogspot.com.

You need to learn some humility AND some manners. But I doubt my opinion matters. Is there anyone you respect enough to communicate with, without conveying childish arrogance?

And whose Guru are U? Really...

of course I looked at your link, but I also wanted some other opinions, hope that's OK with you... I'm just your average layman, no one's guru or expert, so you have to excuse my naivety, I assumed people here would provide me links without arrogant attitude. Needless to say, after reading your comment I was a bit shocked someone with so much history as a reliable source was also rude and arrogant, but now I will be better prepared for it in the future.

What is the problem with someone asking a question that they can find answers to elsewhere, don't you think it is possible I might have thought the answers I could get here would augment those I got elsewhere? This is a great site, I send a link to "important people" whenever I communicate with one of "them." But I hope they don't get the same treatment when and if they approach this place for insight.

You sound like anyone who asks a question that might be answered elsewhere is some sort of nuisance. Read your original comment, especially the "get a clue" jab, what part does something like that play in the transfer of knowledge? Other than announcing to anyone who asks that you won't respond unless you get some ego boost out of it. Why are you compelled to do ANYTHING but answer a question?

Either answer a question to the best of your ability based on the content, or just leavt it alone, but acting like you can control every aspect of someone's query is, well, a bit over the top. Get over yourself.

Thank you.

A response to Lyn that demonstrates "humility AND some manners" could go something like this:

Thanks, Lyn! The figures you provided, which work out to roughly 24 kWh per day, look about as I would expect based on my own electric bill and those of friends and acquaintances. I notice that there seems to be pretty good agreement among the three sources referenced.

You're right, the question was pretty vague, wasn't it. I'm sure there are towns in many parts of the world where usage is a very small fraction of what we use here."

Oh, say 500W multiplied by 24h multiplied by 5000 residents....<tap, tap, tap>....er.....60,000kWh/day, +400%/-70% depending on location.

Add street lights?

What about shops and offices? Manufacturing industries?

Er......phone the local electricity supplier. That would be the best bet.

OK, here's what's up, guys, maybe you will be a bit less arrogant and more sympathetic if you understand why I asked that question the way I did.

For more than a few years, (my first "local loop" effort was a letter to Jimmy Carter when he was still President, just for time reference) I have been trying to convince the local community leaders around here to consider putting up a small array of wind turbines, enough to provide the town with all its power in average circumstances, then sell it back to the grid when there's an over-abundance.

Unfortunately Kansas does not have net metering, and the coal plants own the state legislature, and the officials I would deal with are not exactly forthcoming with the kind of info I would like tohave to make my case that a small town in sunny country with lots of wind and agriculture might benefit from wind as primary, solar as peak and biofuel as backup.

So, to get an idea about just how large an array of wind turbines might be capable of producing that energy, I wrote my question here, so I can put together the information with links and information resources they can look at to see where I came up with my numbers.

Sorry to all of you if that was a nuisance, and I didn't think it would be necessary to explain all of this to get enough respect to get a basic answer to a fairly generic question. Apparently, to get an answer here these days, I have to stroke egos not brains, so i will remember that in the future and offer a soliloquy instead of a simple question.

Please check out the local blog I started many years ago to understand what I menat by "The Local Loop", I am no expert, but I'm certainly not ignorant. And I would appreciate some help in my attempts to convince these coal-addicts there is a better alternative.

If you want to give me your opinions other than just answering my question, read that blog carefully and critique it for me. I am serious.

http://lindsborg.blogspot.com/

All I want from my question is an estimate of the average, if that is so difficult, then just leave it alone.

Nuff said?

PS; is the word "average" foreign to you? Pretty simple formula. Come up with high and low estimates, add them together and divide by two... I can't even get a KWh figure here. Just rude superior coments.

In my area, I'd estimate a typical home uses about 20 [kW-hr/day].

I'll use x5000 homes (instead of residents), which gives you a ballpark figure of 100 [MW-hr/day].

Hope that helps .

immensely... thank you.

"interconnection" and "net metering" are very different, Doorman. You have to be a publicly owned utility to get paid for surplus production in Kansas. You can eliminate your electric bill, but you can't profit from anything above and beyond your own needs here.

And the Local Loop concept DEPENDS on local turbines, the idea is to decentralize the grid, create LOCAL LOOP grids that are self-contained and only tap the grid when the alternatives come up short or they have extra poser to sell.

There is no "final leg" leading from the grid to the consumers, the local loop it legless, it is self-sufficient and needs no transmission-grid access except for extreme situations, or as a mediaum to sell it's surplus to metro areas and/or surrounding communities. Ideally, the "final leg" you speak of would only be used for that purpose, to transmit excess energy to available markets.

Imagine a thousand small towns, each producing three or four times their own requirements...just how much total energy would that constitute is certainly speculative, but it would surely be substantial enough to eliminate the need for more than a few new coal-fired plants. I'm an optimist, so I believe it could literally supplant fossil fuels, if it was subsidized with even a fraction of the tax resources the oil industry receives as corporate welfare.

By incentivizing the local loop, so communities can actually sell their over-abundance, it would create a viable alternative that isn't just speculation, THIS COULD ACTUALLY HAPPEN. On how large a scale is the only question. But this isn't a pie-in-the-sky plan, it could really happen, one small town at a time. Incentive is a powerful thing.

I'll be brief and specific. This is not how the grid works. Better? You MUST have very good legs, or you will never achieve economic feasibility. Having localized production means you can have many, shorter, legs. We already possess many of those. To decide that a design goal is to always supply your ring except in extreme situations may give your a stick it to the man good feeling, but it's very expensive.

How are no legs more expensive than long legs?

Because building self sufficient rings will force you to build production facilities that have very poor capacity utilization. You will deploy a large contingent of equipment that will be underutilized for much of the time.

You could build systems that will meet baseline loads (usually) and that through their legs, can access central or other ring plants for peak period demand, which by definition are for short periods, say 25% of the day. A network of 25 wind and solar rings could probably all share 3 coal plants to achieve reliability, at a cost far lower than building 25 rings that could individually meet all of their peak demand. But very good legs, and cooperation is required.

"You will deploy a large contingent of equipment that will be underutilized for much of the time" not true; all except for the biofuel generators, but the wind turbines will be used continuously, when there's no doldrums, and the solar panels operate even in low light, although at diminished capacity.

But since the grid exists, using it as the "moderator" for these local production facilities is already an option.

That being said, the local loop I envision can stand alone, look a bit more closely, the reason I list biofuels as the backup is that those generators would only kick on to fill the gaps. Since this plan includes the actual biofuel production facilities, it is a matter, also of putting the profits from the production of that fuel back into the local economy, rather than in the pockets of remote investors in those coal plants.

Again, I know we will use the grid to make the transition, but once the "local loop" is established, it should stand alone, particularly in areas blessed with an abundance of all three of the alternatives (wind, solar, ag biomass) propose as a complete loop. It is more than just panels and turbines, it is biogas and liquid fuels included in that loop, if you look at the plan.

Short or no legs don't require knees or ankles just stick your shoes to your arse & off you go! Good blog this I'm really enjoying it, If two of you lived closer it would have come to blows.

the coal plants own the state legislature

Until you solve that dilemma, your efforts are futile. You know enough to provide a workable solution, but your work at this time is like teaching a tone-deaf pig to sing Wagnerian Opera: doomed to failure, and it annoys the pig. Step 1: organize your friends and replace the legislature at the ballot box.

"teaching a tone-deaf pig to sing Wagnerian Opera:"

that is about as accurate an analogy as I've read, EU, but we still have to try. I've been pushing this local loop idea since Jimmy Carter was President, and I will continue to roll this stone across this prairie until I find a hill to climb with it... or something like that...

Oh, look. Some more information over and above the original post. Now, that is interesting.

John,

I had a look at your blog site. It's interesting, now that we know what you're up to. I salute your perseverance, but then you Swedes are a stubborn lot, ya? I had a look at Lindsborg's website too. Nice town.

My concern with corn and beans as biofuels is what effect they have on the world's food prices. I have read that their increased use is raising the price of critical food stocks used by less developed countries. It this true?

Biofuel as the backup, not the primary, was what I suggested.

I'm a cellulosic ethanol and biobutanol fan myself. And I saw some sweet corn once in Davis, California that has the sweetest leaves and stalks I've ever tasted, and that is saying something. I grew up in Greene County Iowa (world's best dirt) in a family with a seed corn company and a few hundred acres of hybrid seed corn growing.

I'm also a heritage seed fan, but if we can hybridize a sweet corn with sweet stalks and leaves, then the grain can stay in the feed loop, and the fiber can go to the energy loop.

The idea is to incentivize alternative energy independence to small communities, so the produce a surplus.

Thanks,

But, 5 years ago we bought a place 7 miles north of the Buffalo Ridge wind energy complex in Minnesota, so I know some about wind farms, and the AWEA, already. Whenever I go there, which isn't often enough, I drive out to the wind farm at night and just look and listen to the hum.

I'm all for alternate, renewable power generation, but I'm still worried that burning corn as fuel may impact some people adversely.

I too worry about burning food crops. I cannot remember exactly but there were problems in either central america or south america and italy because prices were going up on foodcrops because of competition with grains. It worries me when I fill up my tank and the sign says 10% ethanol, where that came from. I think the most viable biofuel coming out is that from algae, but that will take years to develop the necessary infrastructure. Algae is fast growing, very promising and we have millions of acres of desert land that could be converted somehow to grow it by building tanks and a greenhouse like structure to grow algae. Other biofuels definitely if using byproducts such as corn husk and stalks, the remnant from sugar cane, etc. I think in the future we will see more communities providing their own power, eliminating the large conglomerates that provide power now. Our grid is old, and will fail sooner or later. Smaller, more localized power stations would make for more efficient supply with less problems of blackouts. What it will take though is for politicians to get their heads out of their a***es long enough to smell the roses.

"What it will take though is for politicians to get their heads out of their a***es long enough to smell the roses"

There-in lies the rub... anyone who says the energy industry is some paragon of free enterprise is either naive, or one of them, and they are lying deliberately. Monopolists rule those politicians with contributions and they go to DC like sheep, to be devoured by the corporate monopolist wolves, then they are crapped out as high-paid lobbyists.

On average, the typical American home uses about 40KWH per day, (I'm not sure where the other poster got 20, but I know my local utility uses 1200 KWH per month) According to some research, about 25% of power is used for residential applications, meaning that 75% is industrial, municipal and commercial. Because the average household is greater than 2 people, we will guess 2500 residential meters x 40 = 100,000 KWH's. per day. This is 25% of the total load, giving you an answer of 400,000 KWH per day. This is of course generic, which is what you asked. Hope this helps.

If I wanted to size a solar PV array for this "ring" , which is what I do, you would need about 12 megawatts of panels. It would not be imperative that you used a 100% supply number to make this a reality. A local municipal ring that becomes the electricity provider for residents inside the ring is not uncommon. That ring is often the city limits in a small town. It is basically a small utility, subject to the same Power Purchase Agreements and Supply requirements as any utility. It must contract with other power suppliers (probably coal fired plants owned by the major utilities) to purchase power when they are not producing enough. With PV, this is of course whenever it is dark, plus all other sub-optimal times. They can also negotiate sales agreements for excess production. The operations of this newly created utility (co-op is a common format, although sometimes they are privately financed and owned or are joint ventures with cities) They have costs that must be absorbed by its rate payers.

Lyn excellent answer, it is very difficult to answer blank questions, the same question could have been how much air do atheletes breathe a day

JEP, if your goal is accomplishment, then please go with PFR's back-of-the-envelope 400,000 kW-hrs. FWIW, it passes the smell test, but what do I know. I've got one wind app in the store, with another in testing with professional wind assessors. (The pesky so-and-so's keep finding bugs in *MY* program. Can you believe it???)

You'll need to substantiate your wind resource. Start with NREL's wind maps. After that compare what you can get -- nominal resource per sq meter times capacity factor (go with a pessimistic 20%; that way you can be pleasantly surprised if it's too low) to what you want -- Ye Olde 400,000 above -- and you'll have a feel for how many turbines of size "x" that you'll need.

If your goal is activity, then I suspect you need do nothing different.

You said, "Honey attracts more friends than vinegar." I agree. (1) "I assumed people here would provide me links without arrogant attitude" (2) "was also rude and arrogant" (3) "You sound like " (4) "acting like you can control every aspect of someone's query is, well, a bit over the top. Get over yourself." (5) "Apparently, to get an answer here these days, I have to stroke egos not brains" (6) is the word "average" foreign to you? (7) "I can't even get a KWh figure here. Just rude superior comments." On average, I'd say those words were more vinegar than honey, so maybe that explains your difficulty in attracting friends on this blog.

These guys are engineers. Sigh. It can't be helped. The poor devils are more left-brained than programmers. They feed on data, data, data. (Anyone who has a lick of sense would feed on efficient algorithms, but I won't go there.) Only then will they give you an estimate. Not an answer, mind you. Even if it's Ek = 0.5mv^2, you can't get an answer out of 'em w/o also getting, "plus or minus blah-bitty-blah, subject to yada yada yada."

You also said, "You need to learn some humility AND some manners." Yup. Don't we all....

"These guys are engineers."

I'm starting to get that the inevitable by-product of engineering acumen is manifest as abject arrogance... at least in some.

Funny, though, Einstien was a very humble character. So I don't think "genius" and arrogance are synonymous, I guess some people can't handle their own genius very well.

It is just not enough for them to be smart, in their own brilliant minds they have to be "smarter", and that is the same as physical bullies, there's always someone bigger and stronger (or smarter and more experienced).

Thanks for the input, now we can come up with a formula I think is reliable, if not unimpeachable.

BTW, for anyone reading this, that " Yes, this comment is very likely to be considered to be 'off-topic'." box below goes against my blogger's grain, how often has a meandering thread provided more than one answer, you should not be so stringent around her about thread-adherence, sometimes a good conversation takes more than one detour on it's journey.

Jep do not be so sensitive. Watch the TV show Big Bang Theory to see what high intelligence can mean.

Search American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and they have all sorts of info and links.

Take Lyn to the September AWEA trade show to see if you two can get to like each other.LOL

Promoters of traditional energy say people in favour of wind, solar, and geo energy are in favour of blackouts.

I think we are all getting along now.

Here's a photo of Hendricks. Ok, two photos. Next time I'm there, I'll have an open house. BTW,the avatar is my barn in Hendricks.

Well, Einstein was not an engineer.

Engineers are data driven. Ask any question...they will spit out an answer. Ask any question with insufficient information or parameters...they get testy.

I could not get a single engineer to sign off on my medieval catapult design. (A similar example to yours in that there was simply not enough information to come up with an answer good enough for anybody to sign off on. Engineers are VERY risk adverse.)

That being said... I would like to add a couple of things to the mix, just for your consideration. I don't think your blog addressed them, but then, I have not read the whole thing.

Wood pellets can be made from corn stalks and straw...leaving the corn to feed the world.

Sugar can be made from wood pellets by many patented processes involving bacteria. Alcohol and biodiesel can be the result.

Sunlight is free, but the required tantalum and copper and rare earths to make photocells are now considered "War Metals". (Wars are now being fought so you can have a freakin cell phone! How weird is that!)

To make wind mills that last long enough to pay back the energy it took to make them requires stainless steel. Have you SEEN how much energy goes into mining, smelting and refining the nickel, chromium and steel to make stainless steel? Is your windmill part of the solution or part of the problem? Just askin...really, really REALLY hoping it can be proven to be part of the solution (but I doubt it, at least for the long term.)

What is missing from this analysis (on this thread) is a goal. You figure we are going to run out of coal or oil? You don't want to pay for coal or oil? You figure that the way things are going, nobody will be able to pay for coal or oil because there are no jobs and no money? You want to burn less fossil fuel to limit global warming? Four different goals, four different answers. I can think of four more, but then so can you.

And what makes you think that a powerful lobby group like a utility company will go along with this "buy surplus electricity from the little guys". Yeah...they will DO it if they are legislated to do it, or if they can buy it from the little guy cheaper than they can make it themselves. Which do you favor? I would not favor anything which requires that I trust the local government to look after my interests, or the big utility companies. What is left? (real question, not a rhetorical question) The answer to this question will dictate future activities in this area.

Yusef

I always enjoy your posts. I am not a defeatist. I am an industrialist engineer pig, exploring ways to do more, see more, experience more newer, better, exciting things. You are assuming that there is a chance that people will not want cell phones and stainless steel, among other things, and that you can figure out a way to get them to recognize the error of their ways.

Standards of living must rise. Technology can and will solve these issues, if we devote resources. Hippies thought we would be peaceful if they believed in peace. Your belief that heavy and rare metals will not be a primary component of human evolution and capital (and war) is simply not realistic.

The solution is to embrace technology, convince people and corporations that they must embrace the global environment, nurture it, quit abusing it, that they can make money doing that, that they can be mainstream by doing it. The stainless steel in a windmill, or silver in a PV panel is miniscule compared to other uses. People like us can convince them that Jeb's ring is worth investing in, because they can make money and protect the environment. Telling them that they don't need cell phones isn't helping, because they are going to buy cell phones.

Hee hee...

touched a nerve did I? (yeah, we are all friends here...grin!) Well, I am not a hippie, and I don't want a return to a back to the land mother earth lifestyle. I like my computer, thank you! Tantalum capacitors and all.

I see very few defeatists on these pages...I NEVER considered you to be one! And I am not a defeatist at all. I think my posts are very positive. The good thing about engineering and engineers in general is that when the problem is clearly stated, the answer is not only possible, but very obvious. I spend an inordinate amount of time re-defining the questions....in the face of some vested interests and opposition in many cases, not to mention a fair quantity of "we have always done it that way".

I did not propose a single solution in my post. I pointed out some common fallacies regarding solutions proposed in the past. Well, actually I did propose one...making wood pellets which can be burned immediately, or turned into ethanol. I don't see the down side.

There is NO chance that people won't want cell phones and stainless steel. Therefore, any solution must take into account the political reality which leads to war over scarce commodities. If it takes a regime change to get what we need, then we will do it, as the events in Tripoli this week so clearly demonstrated. The price of a war should be figured in if you want to cover the state of (whatever) with solar panels. Already we are fighting wars over mining rights in sensitive countries. I am just saying, thats fine...so long as you recognize and figure in the true cost. How many soldiers are worth a barrel of Libyan oil? Somebody has a figure somewhere. How many to secure a rare earths mine?

And seriously, that ring. Cool idea. Will have to come about sooner or later because, you know, we really ARE running out of oil. I especially like the small local approach to it. I would recommend KEEPING it local because as soon as you get the corporations and big government involved...it will collapse under the regulatory weight.

I dunno...sounds like it could become part of a "hundred mile" plan, where all consumable goods come from within 100 miles. Lots of those out there, never saw such a plan include power though. Perhaps its time.

(And yeah...it breaks my heart to see a tractor trailer drop off a load of lettuce and then fill its tanks with fossil fuel for the trip back. There is "something" very, very wrong here. Gut wrenchingly wrong. A hundred years from now, we will be looking at our oil consumption the way we look at women who died from lead based makeup a hundred years ago, shaking our heads and wondering "just what WERE they thinking!". So a local "ring" seems like a reasonable idea. So long as you keep ALL the costs in mind.)

"To make wind mills that last long enough to pay back the energy it took to make them requires stainless steel."
...maybe not?
http://www.google.com/search?q=ancient+windmills&hl=en&prmd=ivns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=0OMETrvaOsm00AHSl9jZCw&ved=0CDMQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=674

and what if there were one of these atop every transmission pole?

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://wind-power-generator.com/images/Vertical_Axis_Wind_Turbines.jpg&imgrefurl=http://wind-power-generator.com/Vertical_Axis_Wind_Turbines.html&h=287&w=169&sz=9&tbnid=wcGTvuv0-nVC_M:&tbnh=90&tbnw=53&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dvertical%2Bwind%2Bturbines%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=vertical+wind+turbines&usg=__NlyqPqnU6U4xN8R-UljkVqozfS0=&sa=X&ei=y-UETvKSH_Gy0AHQuNDnCw&ved=0CG0Q9QEwBQ&dur=1069

And as for this; "And what makes you think that a powerful lobby group like a utility company will go along with this "buy surplus electricity from the little guys". Yeah...they will DO it if they are legislated to do it,"

that is exactly why I started that blog in the fiurstplace and came up with the whole "local Loop" concept, because Kansas DOES NOT have net metering, and only our legislature can change that. But if you are familiar at all with the position we are in right now with our new state legislature, you will know the coal industry has put a lot of money into their campaigns, and unless people are willing to promote alternatives like I have tried o do whenever possible, there's no chance we will ever see the opportunity to progress to at least SOME alternatives.

Keep in mind, I'm talking about THOUSANDS of communities creating a surplus, not just a handful, and unless I'm missing something, you can create as much electricity with a thousand small generators as you can with a dozen large ones, once it is converted into pure sine wave it is all the same and flows along the grid quite efficiently... to the point that the quality of power generated by those myriad sources would be indistinguishable from power generated by mega-sources.

So I think, despite the lack of engineering expertise that is obvious to most of you, I have at least addressed many of the doubts that tend to accompany any discussion about decentralized power, the whole concept of the Local Loop is just that. And while a tornado or a terrorist might be able to take out one of those mega-plants, it wold b much harder for nature OR pernicious people to disable such a diverse web of sources. By incentivizing it for small communities, by offering them the opportunity to sell their excess to the grid, and thereby lowering their own local tax and utility rates, it boosts both the speed of their participation and extent to which they invest in this effort.

And, btw, I never assume anyone is going to just accept what I say as "fact", it is mostly "food for thought." Hopefully, deep thought that might lead to a real and whole answer.

So you prefer the "legislate" method. The "There oughta be a law solution".

Thats fine. Personally I prefer other solutions, other answers and other methods, but YMMD. (Why am I reminded of King Canute passing a law demanding the tide not come in?)

Ah well. I just happen to believe that it is easier (but not cheaper) to go "off grid" than to try to get the ones who built the grid to pay for the privilege of having built a grid in the first place. But as I said, YMMD.

(Why do I always feel that I have a unique perspective on just about everything? I think its because I evaluate and use all the variables, not just the ones that support my cause de jour. But I suspect I am simply guilty of looking at the goal first, and only then examining how to achieve it instead of walking around like a man with a hammer, to whom everything looks like a nail.)

I fear that anything I say that does not instantly support your decades long quest to set the world right will be simply rejected, so I shall simply say good luck with that, and retire from this thread.

If to know were to do,

then princes would be kings

and tiny chapels would great cathederals be...

Coal companies own the legislature? No not really but the legislature is (should be) more interested in common sense and business and the RE sources you mention all have gross failings to date. The problem with ethanol, methanol, wind and solar is greens pushing expensive legislation that really does not make sense - today.

Without connecting to the grid (which greens seem to hate) none of them make any sense at all.

Storage for solar & wind - nothing on the horizon even.

Ethanol/methanol, wind, solar - do away with all subsidies and let them find their own legs - they will but takes time. Support for research is a good thing. Spending stimulus money such as throwing 500 million at Solyndra was a political sop and stupid beyond belief.

Stand alone local nets - never gonna happen.

Before you take on the Big Guys, go on Amazon and find a book called

'Cape Wind' by Wendy Williams & Robert Whitcomb

It is about Jim Gordon's efforts to put a wind farm 20 miles off shore from Martha's Vineyard. Very in depth, behind the scenes documentary, about the underhanded opposition he came up against.

I think Leornardo de Vince drew up the first plans for a windmill and we are still trying to get them through Planning Review...

If you go on Google Earth and fly around France, they are all over the place there out in farm country with crops and cattle growing and grazing right under them.

Good Luck!

According to Cape Wind research, the average American household uses 6,450 kWh (6.45 mega-watt hours) a year.

That would be 32,450 mega-watt hours a year for a town of 5000 with no major industry to speak of.

A big wind turbine produces about 3 mega-watts at 16 rpm's blade speed so it would have to operate for about 10,150 hours a year or 443 days so you would need more than one, determined by the average annual wind speeds.

Since they average about 30% annually of their maximum potential output you'd probably need four 80 meter tall turbines to put out enough to offset your grid bill for the entire town.