this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)
Green Energy
2399 readers
12 users here now
Everything about energy production and storage.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
1500 kWh per year is effectively nothing. That runs a midrange gaming PC for a few hours. The company won't even tell you the price up front (the product page just has a link to their contact form), but word elsewhere on the web is that little turbine with that piddly output costs somewhere in the neighborhood of a ludicrous $5500. Per the graphs on the product page, their turbines also require a very narrow range of wind speeds to even come close to the claims about the power output: 12 m/s, which in 99.9% of the world is a significant gust, but it shuts off entirely at 14 m/s, and the output drops off very rapidly with wind speed. At half its maximum wind speed, it's outputting 1/8 of its maximum output.
Contrast these limitations with traditional large wind turbines, which cut-in at around 4 m/s of wind speed (same as the Liam), but can maintain full capacity along a much wider range of wind speeds, typically from around 10 m/s all the way up to 20 m/s. For these turbines, half their maximum windspeed is still maximum power output. It's a night and day difference in efficiency.
This mini-turbine may not be a scam, but it's a product with a vanishingly small market. It's for people who live in very particular locations where solar is either so inefficient as to not make financial sense or their property is occluded for most of the day, yet they also have access to continuous high winds that don't fluctuate much and average right around this turbine's sweet spot but no higher. There might be 1000 people in the entire world that this product is suited for, and I wouldn't be surprised if the real number is far fewer. There's no justification for any article to so enthusiastically say it "destroys" solar panels.
1 500 kWh isn't a lot but a mid to high range PC should be able to run for at least 1 500 hours per year on that. Which is slightly above 4 hours a day if you use it every single day.
You're right, I was thinking in Wh. I don't think it changes my overall point though, which was that if one's goal is to generate clean energy, most people don't live in the ideal conditions for this device and hence have much more cost-efficient means available. I've edited my post.