I’ll give it a “Nope”. Nice effort, but… Let’s see if it’s still running after a year. Surprised it’s not from Eastern Europe. Note that if turned sideways, the support arms alone could replace the blades, and you’d have no reversing forces that plague vertical-axis turbines, which seem to self-destruct on a regular basis, which is why you seldom see one actually running. It’s always so tempting to “rescue” the vertical-axis concept, but we all know how it turns out… 
Michael Bergey
President & CEO at Bergey Windpower Co. LLC
2 j
Good work! But aluminum is not a good blade material due to poor fatigue resistance. FRP and wood are better materials, but wood requires more maintenance.
Is it the same for aluminum AWES?
A post was merged into an existing topic: Random Engineering, Physics, …, Concepts and Ideas
Genesis Mission (Us Government) https://youtu.be/p6Ejmhwb8Sc?t=785
scary
notice how similar “Genesis” is to the Google “Alpha Evolve”
We’re going to AI to AI the AI outa Aiverything
A post was merged into an existing topic: Random Engineering, Physics, …, Concepts and Ideas
Thanks for posting this, Pierre: It’s great to see enthusiasm for new ideas. That is a positive. The theme itself however, just my opinion/observation, seems quite redundant at this point. Kites for towing ships seems to have been, if not disproven, at least shown to be marginal, at best, in terms of actual usefulness, with the general results being that they are not worth the trouble for a crew to bother with. But the clincher was when I saw the idea of “generation” from towing a ship (again), remembering that the sail (kite) is only expected to usually assist the propulsion of a ship, rather than totally power it, part of the now-known marginal utility of kites for ships. If the sail can’t usually totally power a ship, how is it going to have enough extra power to generate electricity besides towing the ship? But my thought was “As long as they’re not going to try to say they can produce hydrogen onboard through electrolysis, at least they’re not completely delusional.” But no, next I read they DO think they are going to produce hydrogen onboard, I guess for fuel? All this stuff gets SO redundant by this point. We’ve spent years debunking the concept of hydrogen as energy storage: You get back maybe 12% of the energy input after all the steps of electrolysis, compression or liquefaction, hydrogen storage or transport with all that hydrogen embrittlement of steel, and then energy retrieval by a combustion engine or a fuel cell, and multiplied inefficiencies of all the steps involved. Elon Musk has called hydrogen as a form of energy storage “idiotic” or something close to that. He seems to be one of the few people capable of doing elementary-school arithmetic these days. Anyway, I would say “good luck”, but at this point, I don’t think any amount of luck will help. Unworkable concepts are just that: unworkable. No matter how many trendy, emotional boxes this old idea may check, I can’t see it going anywhere. I have not posted lately because just about everything we read on this site is nonsense, and it gets tiring to keep pointing out what is obvious to clear-thinking people. What about the latest offer to buy a foreign Savonius patent? Do we need to go through the entire explanation, and complete history of the Savonius concept yet again? Last I left off, we were dissectng the fact of an internationally-promoted supposed giant blimp with a ring of twelve10-kiloWatt turbines, claiming a MegaWatt output, until Pierre noticed A.I. artifacts in the videos, which verified our skepticism that anyone had actually built such a loser contraption. Even Reddit was debunking the fake windpower blimp. For me, the sad thing is, as you can see, it’s hard to even comment on any of this without writing a dissertation. Three words would suffice in response to most, if not all, of these endless claims of supposed future achievements: “No You’re Not.” Sorry to have to be the only reality check here, and it is really not a good use of my time, but I feel obligated, after all these years of people claiming to be “really smart” or “smarter than the status quo”, whereas in realty they usually do not know what they are doing, are not even up-to-speed on wind energy, and nothing they say ever comes true. . 16 years ago, with all the untargeted crazy-talk at the first High Altitude Windpower Conference in Chico, California, I thought the wannabe-AWE crowd needed the guidance, or at least factual input, of someone with at least a little experience with wind energy, but it was like trying to wet a fabric saturated with water repellant - it doesn’t soak in. What I realized is, either someone has common sense, or they don’t. Either they can do elementary arithmetic or they can’t. Either they can learn about technology, as far as what works and what doesn’t, or such thinking is out of their reach. The current state of all the AWE promises of future success, by this point, says it all. Nothing in regular operation - still… I wake up to see the latest bad ideas, or outright lies based on deceptive A.I. renderings posing as facts, and just throw up my hands. Nobody flags the frauds. Nobody seems capable of even recognizing the falsehoods, except Pierre. There is nothing more I can say. Writing page after page of factual analyses does not help a single bit. Pierre, you seem to be the only other AWE-oriented person who can comprehend any of this. As for the rest, including these latest redundant statements of the same old “future accomplishments” that make no sense whatsoever and therefore will never happen, it’s just more of the same. I just don’t know what else to even say. Some people just can’t stand facts, or as I used to characterize that one poster-child of ignorance, “allergic to facts”. I’ve been saying that from day-one. Gotta go - there are a million things I need to get done right here in the real 3-D world, and trying to talk sense in certain venues is not appreciated as it should be anyway, so, I really can’t do any more to help. Have a McDay!
Very astute post. What’s going on here is a bunch of people who have never even run a workable wind energy system, let alone built one, let alone designed one, seizing on the opportunity to apply whatever first-grade-level knowledge they might have acquired in the endless debunking of their own flawed projects, and feign expertise in the face of what they can now identify as a typical beginner who got a typical wind energy beginner patent issued, and thinks it is significant.
When I saw the first post in this topic, I just saw the typical know-nothing statement that the problem with existing wind turbines is they don’t start working in very light winds, like saying the problem with solar is it doesn’t work at twilight, when the fact is, there is not enough energy in sunlight at twilight to be worth chasing after! Real wind energy people know all this without skipping a beat, but well-intentioned beginners with no knowledge or experience are clueless.
The next symptom of ignorance is the retreat to Savonius turbines, with all their mistargeted talking points of “responding better to low wind speeds”, “more suitable for urban environments”, etc., even though if these talking points were valid, we would see Savonius turbines littering every crowded city by now, but we see none.
With just those two mistargeted talking points, we have the two most common symptoms of a beginner who has assumed they knew what they were doing, but who instead falls into a typical well-worn syndrome that I alternately call “The Professor Crackpot Syndrome” or “The La Brea Tar Pits of Wind Energy” where you can find the dead carcasses of most new wannabe wind energy companies and most AWE efforts.
Now, Pierre and I have a lot of discussions offline from this venue, where we are allowed to simply discuss facts, without having our posts deleted. I placed some text from the first post into Google with their AI interface, along with the name of the person posting, and got back a PDF of a Chinese patent, which I forwarded on to Pierre, who then found some English version I guess, and went on to start a discussion of so many details the original poster was not providing, and now we have a typical “fact-fest”, where the would-be “innovator” is being peppered with the simple facts that disassemble all of his original talking points.
This is all very typical stuff, and trying to stop the endless profusion of crackpots is, as I told Pierre offline, like holding your hand out thinking you can stop an avalanche. “Inventors” without the requisite knowledge are everywhere, and always will be. Many wind energy crackpots even have PhD’s and high positions in academia! They put Savonius turbines in wind tunnels and try to fine-tune them and write papers about how they solve the “problems” of low wind speeds and “urban” environments…(yet again)
As I told Pierre, in a group of “real wind people” this discussion would never take place to this extent. Everyone in wind energy knows all these facts as the basic ABC’s of their craft, which scarely bear mentioning for the thousandth time, such as the cubic nature of power with wind speed. Wind veterans could just be told the two talking points, and never need to see the rest of the patent, and everyone has a good laugh.
It reminds me of an old story where some people kept telling the same jokes over and over, and eventually just gave each joke a number, and rather than saying the whole joke again they just say the number of the joke, and everyone laughs.
In my case, rather than give the same old joke a number, I just call it “The Professor Crackpot Syndrome”. Always good for a laugh. No need to dissect it to death. it is what it is, it’s always the same, and there is no point drowning in details over it - its a waste of time. Good debunking experience for the perpetual newbies here, but in a group of real wind people, this discussion would have been over long ago.
The frustrating thing is, as you point out, it’s almost impossible to explain all this in a few words to the perpetual newbies here - you have to go through the whole thing from beginnning to end, writing a multipage paper to make the simplest point to the endless know-nothings, rather than just saying the number of the joke. And it never changes. Oh well, time to move on and have an otherwise productive day!
1 Like
This is getting SO ridiculous. I waste the time to spell out a few wind energy facts, for an audience of people who happen to be mostly ignorant of basic wind energy principles, and no track record of ever creating any in-service wind energy system of any kind, ever, and I look a few minutes later, and see my efforts, as well as the efforts of the only other sensible person I’ve seen posting here in a long time, moved to a different “topic”, whereby the messages lose their relevancy to the topic on which they were written. And this endless and pointless censorship all carried out by anonymous people, afraid to even identify themselves.
In reality, there is no point wasting valuable time in futile attempts to educate the willingly un-educatable. That only becomes more of a waste when anonymous wannabe know-it-alls immediately tamper with what we take our valuable time to write. This place is a graveyard of ignorance.
We suffered through years of Mr. Know-it-all endlessly blathering about TRL (“technical readiness level”) of the various failing wind energy attempts covered in these forums. Makani has a TRL of 8, Altaeros has a TRL of 7 , blah blah blah blah blah. Where are they now???
In reality, asking the current crop of AWE wannabes to analyze the readiness of various wannabe AWE systems is like asking the kids in the mentally-retarded class to vote on which of them is most likely to win the Nobel Prize.
They can cast as many votes as they want, but what value do the votes have? What value did ANY of the “TRL” nonsense we’ve suffered over past years carry? I’d say ZERO. Which was always obvious to me, but that doesn’t stop the endless idiots…
How many years did we suffer from this nonstop nonsense of “certain people” pretending to be able to technically and numerically discern which nonfunctional AWE future-failure was least likely to be headed for The La Brea Tar Pits?
从你的言论中，除了看到傲慢与偏见，以及自以为是，我完全看不到对科学的尊重。
1、多组风轮配套1个发电机的方案，是一个高度通用的方案，不论是阻力型风叶，还是升力型风叶都可以用，不论是微风范围内发电，还是中高风速范围发电，我的方案都适用。
2、传统风电技术基本上不可能实现恒功率发电，但我提出的理论可以实现风力的恒压发电方案。
3、面对样机、中国国内的侵权销售的成品机图片。能装作完全看不见，看不懂，或许是你的科学素养吧。
4、我很讨厌无效的沟通，我遇到过不少假专家、假投资人。这两类人，除了无休止的询问所谓的细节，然后就是没素质的侮辱！
Hi Doug, this is an excellent comment. We could be more concise when assessing the symptoms of so-called innovative wind power concepts.
Michael Bergey’s assessments of out-of-the-box wind concepts are summed up in one word: nope.
如果你们的水平就这个样子，那么我或许真的高估你们的专业性了。传统风电的恒功率发电是做不到的，而新的技术——也就是我带来的风叶伸缩技术、多组风轮技术、可变式风叶技术，在理论上完全可以做到，我甚至做出了样机，并且在中国国内又相关企业在进行非法的制作和销售。面对代差的技术，你们得到结论是不行？这让我联想到了爱因斯坦！！
哦豁，这个论坛中，只允许你一个人是真正的专家吗？一个被仿制销售产品和技术，你居然能说出这么多的乱七八糟的话，我非常怀疑你的专业性，直白的说，我认为你是假装自己是专家。因为，你连技术代差都分不清楚，甚至，你都没有意识到什么是风电的未来。
哦，对了，如果你想学习新的风电理论，你可以学习一下我的论文。
微风发电理论闭环(1)(1).doc (580 KB)，看不懂的话，可以联系我