battery-less VAWT -Pacwind[RE-wrenches]

[Matt Tritt]

<x-flowed>

Probably not connected to a load, Nick. I'm looking at two output charts 
for PacWind; one for the SeaHawk, and one for the Mark I. The SeaHawk 
isn't really even worth mentioning (abysmal output), but the Mk I is 
interesting for another reason.

Remembering that the Mk I is rated (by PacWind) to produce 3,700 Watts @ 
38 MPH, the published max power never reached 600 Watts - even in an 
averaged wind of > 14 MPH. Total kWh produced in this same high wind 
month is shown to be 100.8 kWh (so it really blew), but in less drastic 
wind averages of 12.3 MPH (5.5 M/S), it produced only 50.4 kWh. In this 
same wind regime, using a turbine I'm familiar with - the Kestrel e150 
600 Watt HAWT - we see a net output of 85 kWhrs, or approx 69% more 
output than the PacWind.

 From published information on the PacWind web site, you will see that 
the peak voltage is 190 VDC, and the max amps is 20. It doesn't say 
where peak voltage is achieved, but 20 amps X 190 Volts = 3800 Watts, 
right? And we are doing this with a 48" blade swinging a 6'6" circle, of 
which less than 50 % is able to do meaningful work at any given moment. 
No matter how you slice it, this is a 4' rotor, even though it swings in 
a 6' circle. Clearly, this is barely a 500 Watt machine. The listed 
price on these is $4,000.00 They hardly ever hit 600 Watts. $6.66/Watt - 
not including inverter and installation. For a device that will deliver 
50 kWh a month in a good wind zone. 50 X .12 = $6.00/ month from a 
system that will cost a minimum of $7,500. That means a payback in only 
104 years.

Not exactly a good investment in my book.

If they increased the blade height to 10', they might do a bit better?

Matt

Nick Lucchese wrote:

>
> Not that it adds any proof that it's a viable product or not but I did 
> see one spinning quite fast on a recent road trip last month. 
> Unfortunately I did not get my wife to stop the car but it is located 
> about 150-200 miles north of Vegas on HWY 95 at a gas station. It was 
> the Delta 1 model about 40' high. I was so excited it was like seeing 
> Santa Claus. Or at least that's how I saw it in my mind. At the very 
> least I can claim that it spun very fast and stable (while driving by 
> @ 35 mph). Till then I thought the only one that was in use was Jay 
> Leno's. Maybe it's part of their R&D and was given to the station 
> because of it's high profile?
>
> Nick A Lucchese
>
>
>> I agree completely Hugh,
>>
>> I need to add that if Pac Wind, or any maker of VAWT's, is able to 
>> substantiate through independent testing that their equipment 
>> functions as claimed, great! If they aren't part of some kind of 
>> multi-level marketing, great!
>>
>> I think many of us would love to have access to to a viable small 
>> vertical, but they really need to prove, without question, that they 
>> are worth buying, and that they hold together in rough service for a 
>> reasonable period of time. There has been an extreme amount of hype 
>> pertaining to these machines, but who has actually gotten one 
>> (besides the freebies to high profile celeb's)? Where is the data on 
>> performance, and I mean _verified_ performance data? I attempted to 
>> contact people many times at PacWind, and never once was the call 
>> returned. The one time I got through (during business hours), I got 
>> someone who said that "they are all gone for the day", and that they 
>> didn't know anything about the products. This isn't hearsay, it's a 
>> fact.
>>
>> I still have an open mind about VAWT's, and would very likely be 
>> happy to sell one that works. Up to this point, PacWind has been 
>> evasive, secretive and non-forthcoming concerning their products, 
>> especially to those of us in the existing mainstream HAWT world. If 
>> that all changes, cool.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> Hugh Piggott wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> At 12:47 -0500 31/1/08, Nicholas Ponzio wrote:
>>>
>>>>  I'm not holding my breath, but I would like
>>>> to caution people about spreading unverified rumors like this. It just
>>>> makes everyone look bad.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I tend to be more impressed by Kelly.  Let's tell it like it is. 
>>> What looks bad is when nobody mentions that they don't think this 
>>> stuff works, and well-meaning people go ahead and try to use it. 
>>> Then everyone looks bad.
>>>
>>> Let's face it - if there were good experiences out there with 
>>> roof-mounted VAWT turbines, one of us would have heard about them by 
>>> now.
>>
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>> - - - -
>> Hosted by Home Power magazine
>>
>> To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com
>>
>> Archive of previous messages: 
>> http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read
>>
>> List rules & how to change your email address: 
>> www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php
>>
>> Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/
>>
>> Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
>
>
>


- - - -
Hosted by Home Power magazine

To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read

List rules & how to change your email address: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: michael.welch at re-wrenches.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9.bWljaGFl
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit:
http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER
--^----------------------------------------------------------------

</x-flowed>