hovering wind turbine

Is your design similar to the previous lighter than air floating wind turbines that have been discussed on CR4 before (including their inherent problems and limitations)? Do you have some ideas on how to overcome their problems (such as weight to generation power limitations and airborne stability).

or to separate water through electrolysis to hydrogen and oxygen.

Or not. This way will guarantee that your floating turbine never 'gets off the ground' (so to speak. See numerous previous threads on the subject). Let us never speak of this particular 'possible' idea aspect again.

My turbine is very much different!

And about the hydrolisis- August 2008 was published that Daniel Nokera from MIT developed a sistem that makes hydrolisis feasible!

Electrolysis and hydrolysis are two different things, additionally lets wait and see what happens with Daniel's work as, as far as I can see it is still in the lab test stages, is unproven and requires expensive catalysts (such as platinum).

I have seen this sort of development before many times, it usually ends up being unfeasible in the real world due to one thing or another. Best to wait and see some actual real world results and figures before we all get too excited and bet the farm on what looks like yet another good (but unproven) idea.

Back in the 70's I visited a wind generator manufacturer in Lubbock, Tx. He had a kite which consisted of a waterwheel type tube held at the ends by two strings. It spun wildly about its axis and you could control it's position by pulling on one or the other string. It seems like a similar thing could be done on a grander scale.

My sympathies. I too have invented a few things. And like you I have not the money to sell the idea. Like all inventors I too am quiet sure of the potential benefits of my inventions. But so far I do not know of any organisation which will help people like us without swindling us. Perhaps the problem is that there are too many of us, and a good many of our ideas are bound to be un-workable and a waste of time and money for he big boys to look into.

Sounds a bit like a Magenn to me...

http://www.magenn.com/index.php

Now, that's what I'm talking about...

Thanks bbei, It just goes to show how much technology is out there.

One of my heroes once said, "We are not here, to figure out how NOT, to do it!"

Those who do the work, and do somehow figure out how to accomplish a task, and solve a problem, really are heroes.

So many people really do spend a good deal of time figuring out how not to do anything, that it is a wonder we have matches.

It is a coincidence that we are both the same age.

For effective harvesting the zepplin has to be stationary with respect to the ground. Unless the wind passes through the turbine no power will be generated. Ordinarily zepplins (any lighter than air vessel) will be carried along the air current with negligible air velocity past the vessel. Navigation is done using an engine.

The energy required for this will be the same that will be harvested. In efeect what is proposed may turn out to be one of the greater than unity effeiciency machines.

bioramani

Dear Bioramani

If there could be a posibility that I'm a fool,we may assume that an aerodynamic professor will not be that stupid!

What do I mean [I think that I wrote it clearly]: The zeppelin is for transportation of the turbine to a region where there is a forecast to be a storm! The zeppelin's propulsion will be done through a conventional combustion engine and propellers!.

The zeppelin will have an aerodynamic shape!

There the zeppelin will be anchored and tethered in the best direction to harvest the storm!

I think that the zeppelin will be able to harvest much of the storm's energy!

To be efficient the zeppelin must hover on a fixed spot!-and this is the second reason for the aerodynamic shape of the zeppelin: to reduce the aerodynamic dragg of the storm on the zeppelin!

It was only mentioned that the zepplin hovered not tethered. A tethered Turbine is theoretically feasible. What about the tether itself, its weight, tensile properties and other mechanical issues? A single tether will be like a pendulum string. What about oscillations? Strength of the anchor? What guarantee the spot is not over water? (By the way I worked for long in a federal aerospace lab as a researcher.) bioramani

I've to appologize, there are many more details that I didn't disclose, but as I wrote, all of them were discussed with the professor that added few ideas from his knowledge and experience.

The concept was discussed as well with a leading climatologist about the posibility of finding the storms course.

There is absolutely no call for that. One should never put thinking on a halter. Sometimes technically feasible ideas fail commercially simply because supporting technologies were unavailable. Arthur C Clarke wrote about geostationary satellites for communication long before there were rockets that could put anything in orbit. While solar electricity has been around for long, only ongoing research on thin film photovoltaics and ceramic paper batteries seem to have the potential to bring the cost down to competition with thermal power. I am sure that you will have considered storage or other means of bringing the power down to earth. Electrolysis of water is simple, but the gas is bulky unless you use another small turbine to compress this in a light weight bottle. About 27 amp hrs at about 2 volts will produce about 12.5 litres of hydrogen at STP. http://www.mdi.lu/english/airpod.php This has a light weight composite tank that holds almost 200 litres gas at 350 bar. bioramani

I don't think there is a guaranteed method to accomplish what you have in mind. Testimonials from professionals may help, but half of the professionals graduated in the bottom half of their class. I suggest you apply for a grant to exploit your concept. I don't know what grant money is available in your location. In the USA, most inventors who spend grant money, get to retain the inellectual rights to their inventions. An actual system or even a working model would go a long way toward acceptance of your concept.

In theory your idea makes good sense. But I am concerned of how you would be able to convert the wind energy into usable power. A simple generator will require an extension cord running 600-1000 ft into the sky. It further would need to be capable of conducting full capacity of the generator. If the energy was collected in the hovering zeppelin-turbine, that would also require additional weight, combined with the need to lower the assembly to transfer the energy. Additionally there will need to be a second vehicle, or device that is on the ground below to receive the energy.

Have you been able to build a scaled down version to test any of your ideas yet.

I do not want to throw cold water on your idea, I just hope you have realized some of the problems that will arise, and have solutions for them.

Whatever happens, I wish you the best of luck building this.

Last week or two weeks ago the Discovery channel did a test with 7 scientists to design and test this product and they found that the generators where heavy and sagged the overall design did work after many failed attempts.

www.magenn.com

I saw the documentary too, and it reaffirmed my previous concerns regarding real-world practicality, that is power to weight ratio and stability.

Still, if they (and others) can overcome these and the cost/materials usage vs benefit deficit then a viable product may actually come out of it.