Dream on guys. This is nothing more than desperation. 
Thanks a lot. I find it hard to understand just how they conclude that the wake is revitalized. But, it does seem likely that if a kite turbine was installed in the wake of a HAWT, some optimization of power produced vs wake recovery would be done.
The tether should allow an AWE turbine to have more «ooomph» wrt wake recovery than a free flying glider that only could play with mass inertia and lift.
Here is a kite construction idea: https://youtu.be/mvk3RBGXxic?t=103
You could extend one of the rigid elements beyond the hinge, and then connect that extension with the next element with a spring to tension the fabric. Determining the usefulness of this compared to alternatives is for now left as an exercise for the reader.
That the fabric needs to be tensioned shows I think this video Leichtbau-Drachen als Stromproduzenten where you can see the slack fabric fluttering. But maybe that was due to inexperience building kites or with the new technology used.
Minesto latest news:
One of these articles mentions they say they will connect many (100?) of these in a network of some sort.
The second one blithely says it produced its full nameplate power (did it really?), and âpowered 1000 homesâ. OK I could just as easily say my 10 kW home wind turbine here powered thousands of homes, or at least helped to power thousands of homes, since it is connected to the grid, and puts whatever power we are not using in real time, into the grid, with thousands of homes (or more - who knows?) connected.
My prediction? Well I said several years ago that I figure they wonât prevail in the end, not that I see any particular flaw in the design per se, but only due to certain third-party people promoting it that seem to get most things wrong. I would say though, I could easily imagine problems with the tether longevity, not to mention barnacles, seaweed, fishing tackle, leaks, stuff like that.
Anybody who has built real, working systems knows it is rare that they donât end up having unforeseen problems of one sort or another. Sometimes the problems can be easily fixed, other times not so easily.
These articles both compare Minesto to Orbital Marineâs twin water turbines on both sides of a long, narrow barge (is barge the right word?) - maybe a tethered boat? A moored boat? Oumuamua?
Sounds like Orbital is establishing the standard for comparison - good for them.
Oumuamua, er, um, I mean, Orbital, makes more power than Minesto, in their current sizes, but, according to Minesto, their power will be cheaper. Well that is easy to say, and the price of power they cite for Orbital is pretty high.
One glaring detail about Minesto that jumps out a me, and probably other wind energy people, is the machined bronze or brass ârotorâ has the look of a boat propeller, and Iâm pretty sure, by the look of it, was made by a boat propeller company, most likely being the only structure they could find that could handle the stresses involved, without breaking.
But, in my opinion, the rotor solidity is too high, and the blade pitch is too steep, for most efficient power extraction from an open flow. Well, what do I know? Iâm just a wind person, but it is a similar fluid dynamics situation. Maybe it works OK, in spite of being less efficient. Iâd still be more inclined to place my betz on Orbital, which is a simple design that may easily be improved and expanded over time.
Indeed, the simplicity of Orbital must take precedence. Water, in addition to being a harsh environment, is 800 times denser than air.
The same architecture but in the air is much more difficult: the air has difficulty transporting heavy structures at the end of long ropes, in particular classic wind turbines.
Where Minesto might resemble crosswind AWES projects, is the material savings which may prove illusory given the complexity of operation and control, as well as the physical constraints due to travel, for a production certainly higher (but not much more), but cyclically irregular, which amplifies the constraints.
Lets not be all gloomy. The article states that we do have a kite based power plant feeding power to the grid. That is good news, even if it were exaggerated. But on the face of it, I would rather trust Minestoâs claim of x households powered compared to baseless saying it could not be so. [that being said I am not automatically believeing Minestos claims are as entirely good as they sound]
After reading the two articles, all we know is in the title of New Atlas: â28-ton, 1.2-megawatt tidal kite is now exporting power to the gridâ. What we donât know: how much energy in kWh was produced, and over how long.
Yeah, well, a few days ago you were trusting a slanted cartoon over the actual Greenland ice core data, soâŠ
But in this case, I was referring to these two articles and their headlines, not what Minesto claims per se.
The Popular Science articleâs headline said the turbine âpowered 1000 homesâ as though that was an accomplished fact. First of all, that implies that just over a MegaWatt COULD completely power â1000 homesâ - yes maybe if everyone was on vacation. Lots of times, homes are using much more power than a kiloWatt each. We hear this sort of stuff all the time. Additionally, it implies the machine was continually producing its full output right away, which seems unlikely.
Writers who donât even know the difference between a kiloWatt and a kiloWatt-hour, nevermind how much power the average home actually uses, are just working within their limited ability to even understand the nuances of what they are writing about. As we know, promoters of dubious energy production schemes tend to vastly understate the power requirements of homes when translating their hypothetical max output to how many hundred or thousand homes it âis poweringâ (or more usually âwill powerâ, in the future) when simply connected to the grid, and maybe just idling or producing minimum power.
So the exaggerations include:
- How much continuous power the unit can output continuously (for hours and hours, without overheating);
- How little power the average home actually uses;
- How close to max output their apparatus actually produces, how much of the time, during normal operation
- How many homes are actually connected or being powered by their generator - could be a million homes, fractionally powered, or could be a microgrid with less than a thousand homes - we are not provided any such details, just the headline-clickbait, âdonât askâ, bumper-sticker version.
These details depend on how much power is being produced how much of the time, and how big of a grid they are connected to. So the whole thing about powering X hundred or X thousand homes is rife with abuse, misinterpretation, and loose standards with regard to veracity. Itâs more just a buzzword thing, and they donât expect any reader to know any more about the subject than the authors, let alone to question anything in the articles, so they pretty much HAVE NO standards.
But the other thing is, the writers seem to imply that the machine simply produced its rated power the moment it was dunked into the water. I would say that is unlikely. That rated power is probably produced a small fraction of the total time operating, if ever. Reading between the lines, my thought is that this is just one more case of magazine writers who scarcely understand what they are writing about, just regurgitating a few facts, and maybe getting a few of them right, while misapplying others.
But meanwhile, personally anyway, I donât see this as such great news, or big news at all. Is it EVEN ânewsâ? This company has been around for many years - maybe over a decade? It was years ago we saw almost the same exact news about a smaller version of the same idea. They keep putting out these press-releases over any tiny benchmark, no matter how long itâs been. Itâs like "Look, we finally actually CONNECTED our grid-tied thingy to the grid! My response is âWhat took you so long?â What about tightening a bolt? Did you tighten a bolt, then throw a party over it?
I mean, one of their last press-releases was something about some component being shipped to them that some other company was actually able to build. Really? Itâs news that a component was shipped? Wow, hope it gets there soon! And now itâs ânewsâ that they finally actually connected something that theyâve been saying they would connect for years and years now?
How about running it for a month or two, and THEN telling us how much energy it produced? And what condition itâs in?
Itâs as though they are so desperate for recognition of ANY seeming âprogressâ, however trivial, that towing it out and connecting 3 wires is a big deal. Itâs as though they are afraid it will catastrophically break down within hours, and feel the need to get out a press-release quickly, before that happens! I mean, they towed it out in a Friday, and the articles appeared Monday! And the magazines obligingly report it as though producing full output, full time, which even Minesto themselves has never claimed. How do we know it is really even actually operating yet? Maybe they just flew it back and forth a couple of times then went home for the weekend. Or maybe they have not operated it at all yet! Wouldnât surprise me. You guys probably donât remember the articles about Altaeros âpowering a remote village in Alaskaâ. It took me to debunk that one. I could tell it looked to frail to withstand anything but the lightest winds. I took the time to make a phone call to that remote village and find out that, just as I had declared, there WAS NO airborne turbine even operating here. There are facts, and there is fluff. And often, one is mistekan for the other!
So I say, big deal, they finally hooked it up. Letâs see how it works!
I just couldnât imagine putting out a press-release every time I hooked up a new turbine. Heck, it could be in little pieces an hour later!
Iâm kind of mystified, why this conversation about an underwater kite was just moved from the suitable topic that describes it, to âSlow Chat IIâ.
I mean, what the heck even IS âslow chatâ? Is that just a trash can for âslowâ people? A punishment, like âgo to your roomâ? Imagine if there were no âtopicsâ, just a âconversationâ. Maybe the âmoderatorâ could take a vacation for a couple of weeks, and see if it hurts anything.
Iâm not the first to note that what purports to be âmoderationâ in this group seems weird and arbitrary. Every time I post something, it seems like I think Iâll just take a moment or two to respond to someone, then I look up and I wrote a page or two. OK thatâs on me. But then to have some unknown person immediately shifting posts around from topic to topic, or just deleting them, for no discernable reason, is irritating and unsettling.
I find myself quite often asking whether it is even a good idea for me to ever post anything in these venues at all. Seems like I could use my time more wisely, given the treatment real wind people with real facts receive.
Low effort, biased, and off-topic. See also the FAQ.
Read what you just wrote and apply it to yourself. You are as bad or worse than Dave Santos et al.
I donât think I should put up with you anymore. Whoever you are, which you are afraid to even say, and I can see why.
edit: And what the F*** are you even talking about - âoff topicâ I was in the underwater paravanes topic, or whatever it was called, with a highly relevant post on that exact topic. YOU moved it to your own stupid non-topic.
In my opinion, you could not get away with treating people like this face-to-face. You feel very smug in your extreme ignorance, hiding behind your anonymity, and behind your keyboard. Thatâs the only way you can get away with this childish crap.
I can only come to the conclusion that there is a mental disorder that causes know-nothings to want to âmoderateâ communication in order to pretend that their own ignorance should be the only thought allowed. Itâs really sick, and Iâm sick of YOU, whomever you are, which of course you are afraid to say.
Iâve just shut off my email notifications so I am not bothered anymore by this nonsense.
I would like to see this interesting analysis (âthe look of a boat propellerâ), and also the comments that followed, in the original and appropriate topic: Minesto Underwater AWE News, because it is an on-topic new, with in first the links to two recent articles about Minesto.
The reader can perhaps understand that you mean the two articles cited are not Minesto news. He will then want to know your motivations.
You are right of course. The journalism is poor. And companies report more positively to make the general public believe progress is much further ahead than an independent engineer would have reported.
I am no longer able to see all that, I dont even read it. I just see «installed at Faroe, delivering electricity to the grid». Which is actually a big deal for another company stuck in the tar pits of energy kites for a decade.
So yes and no
The reader is expected to have basic reading comprehension and critical thinking skills. An exercise for the reader could be to look for those places where the comments were low effort, biased, and off-topic.
Unfortunately I canât do endless hand-holding, and am not inclined to with your attitude. Figure it out yourself with the clues I gave you.
@dougselsam rightly presented these two articles as news in the good topic. In the same time he rightly established a critique on the reality of the news. Indeed:
The answers may be very different than you expect. And Iâm not sure the reader will want to juggle between the appropriate original topic and Slow Chat.
My opinion is that it would be better to avoid unnecessarily soliciting the reader and to put things in their place in this sequence.
Rolf and crew have come a very long way since that video.
Exactly. The question is whether it is even true. I gave examples of previous such statements that turned out not to be true. Whereâs a photo of a meter showing it âpowering 1000 homesâ?
Roddy, you might want to check with Tallak on that. According to Tallak, anything in German is not valid information here, because he doesnât speak German.