AWE in China

Analysis Industry and Market Analysis
1

In China, we focused on two methods from different companies, with prototypes. One for parachute trains in yo-yo mode and including a kite or aerostat lifter, the other for ducted wind turbines such as Altaeros.

These two methods seem to be opposite in the sense that one exploits the drag force of parachutes, while the other uses conventional wind turbines.

However, they have in common the ability to create AWES farm in bumper car mode where collisions between units are damageless.

And it should be noted that the crosswind kite is not represented at all, whether in fly-gen or yo-yo mode.

It would be interesting to know the motivations behind these choices, although we can get some ideas.

1 Like
2

Hello again Pierre: My screen says your message has two (2) views. Wow, this is a really widely disseminated conversation, right?

I’d say the motivation is the mere appearance of checking boxes toward eliminating fossil fuels in an area with a severe air pollution problem, along with the urge to repeat the failed experiments of others, but at a larger scale, thinking maybe a larger version would work better. Also, there is a lot of extra money floating around in some places. People like to have fun, and investors know nothing of the realities of wind energy, or blimps, so they can be convinced to supply funding for people to use in such projects regardless of the likelihood of a truly successful outcome. I think it’s the tunnel that throws peoples’ otherwise clear thinking off. That’s all it takes, one seemingly new feature, for investors to abandon math and common sense, and maybe they want to invest in something that looks fun too, as much as the people building them want to have fun. I think its more about having fun than anything else, really. :slight_smile:

1 Like
3

We have been through discussing the BAT a few times, I will just leave it at me not being a big believer in this concept. The Zhonglou is more promising due to its promise og high altitude operation.

I don’t see any of these as the most likely to succeed though.

I would rather say its quite sad that this might represent the state of Chinese AWE activity these days, also reflecting on low activity worldwide.

Facing climate change I believe humanity overall is making a poor choice in not putting more effort into wind energy and AWE as part of that.

Looks like nuclear power may become the new «coal» but because that will take a long time to implement, we will have warming first

4

Hi Tallak: As I often try to remind people, new ideas for generating wind energy are abundant, but they have to pencil out financially to be meaningful. One of my repeated sayings is “There are a million ways to make SOME amount of power from the wind, at SOME cost, but is your idea more economical?”

Heck, they could use a gold-plated blimp, but that would only make it worse. Most real wind people can compare the claimed power output with the claimed diameter (swept area), and see it is impossible. Considering the claimed low weight of the turbines adds another level of absurdity.

1 Like
5

Hi Doug:
Yes, reducing the mass of a wind turbine is an illusion, because somewhere the power depends on the force of the wind and the mass follows. And high altitude winds lead to the requirement of heavier wind turbines.

Solution, including for SAWES: more power = more helium or hydrogen, see page 13.

6

Hi Pierre: Until one has experienced the repeated disappointment and frustration of burning out multiple generators in sustained high winds, it’s hard to understand that it is a MAJOR challenge in wind energy. That’s why I often say, overspeed protection is not the main thing, it’s the ONLY thing.

Now of course to be onboard with this proper thinking, you’d have to have run systems that actually make a lot of power for long periods of time in sustained high winds. Since most big-talker wind wannabes have never built or run powerful wind systems for extended periods of time, this critical information is lost on them - completely ignored. They will never burn out a generator, so it is nothing but empty talk that can be ignored, in their minds.

The main thing is you need a certain amount of copper to carry a certain amount of power. Whether you target high currents at low voltage, or high voltage at low current levels, the total amount of copper required is the same for the same amount of power. If your wire is too thin, it will get too hot in even one spot, which raises the resistance of the wires in that spot, causing a “runaway train” effect that spreads and burns out at least part of the stator, which must then be stripped of wire and rewound, or just thrown away.

You needn’t bother telling wind newbies about this because they don’t care since deep down, they don’t plan on making much power for extended periods anyway. Deep down, they realize they are wasting their time, maybe having a bit of fun.

You also need a certain amount of steel to guide the magnetic fields, a steel rotor to hold the magnets, steel shaft and bearings, and a strong housing, and hopefully the configuration allows plenty of surface area and airflow to remove heat buildup. One could add a cooling system but that has weight and is complicated, expensive, and one more thing to go wrong.

Anyway, certainly steps can be taken to make turbines lighter, to a point, if desired, but there are limits to how much weight one can remove without reducing the power capability or heat dissipation capacity, let alone strength and longevity. As usual, the conversation here must be on an elementary school level, since most participants don’t even know the most basic facts of wind energy. :slight_smile: