My mum´s house, built 1974, has a conventional oil fired central
heating system which supplies hot water to a cylinder and radiators.
The house is in an area with very good wind resource. I want to install
a small wind turbine to supplement the oil fired heating system. The
wind turbine I wish to use has a maximum power output of 1.4kW. The DC
output voltage can be either 12v, 24v or 48v. In windy weather it can
produce 33kW per day.

I wonder what is the best way to tie the wind power into the central
heating system. I have considered the following possibilities:

1. Install a suitable low voltage 1.5kW water heater in or connected to
the cylinder. This should provide lots of hot water but no much thru
the radiators. Can you recomend a suitable water heater?

2. Install a suitable low voltage 1.5kW water heater on the cold water
input pipe to the boiler. Leave the boiler on low so that the pump will
circulate the water thru the radiators and cylinder. Can you recommend
a suitable water heater?

I would greatly appreciate any advice you may have.

Thanks in anticipation.

On 14 Mar 2006 11:48:17 -0800, wrote:

In windy weather it can produce 33kW per day.

kilowatt what?


--

wrote:

I would greatly appreciate any advice you may have.

Why not use something easier like....
http://www.renewabledevices.com/swift/index.htm

Then, Electricity supplier dependent, just use generated power to
supplement daily electricity use (including immersion heater or
whatever), and sell un-used power back to the electricity company.

That's what I am hoping to do as and when we get plans drawn up for
house/garage/roof changes. As we get the full force of prevailing
S.Westerly winds coming up the Severn.

--
http://gymratz.co.uk - Best Gym Equipment & Bodybuilding Supplements UK.
http://trade-price-supplements.co.uk - TRADE PRICED SUPPLEMENTS for ALL!
http://fitness-equipment-uk.com - UK's No.1 Fitness Equipment Suppliers.
http://Water-Rower.co.uk - Worlds best prices on the Worlds best Rower.

Matt wrote:
On 14 Mar 2006 11:48:17 -0800, wrote:


In windy weather it can produce 33kW per day.


kilowatt what?



Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day. Or
approx 1.4kW/hr, also what the OP stated. Together with a low-loss
distribution system to the water heaters that the OP stated, gives
1.4kw/hr (33kw/day) heating to the house.


To the OP - good luck, mate. I'd look towards the higher voltage setting
(48v) to simplify distribution, then check this link for a US
distributor of a 48v, 30A (1440W) water heating element:-

http://www.realgoods.com/renew/shop/...204/ts/1025078

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:46:30 UTC, Mike Dodd
wrote:

Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day. Or
approx 1.4kW/hr, also what the OP stated. Together with a low-loss
distribution system to the water heaters that the OP stated, gives
1.4kw/hr (33kw/day) heating to the house.

The point being made was that the units were mixed - 1.4kW is the power
rating. He probably meant 33kWh (kilowatt-hours) per day, of course (1.4
x 24 isn't far off that).

The measurement of 1.4kW/hr is meaningless, as a watt is (simply) a
measure of power output, not total power - kilowatts *per hour* cannot
mean anything sensible here. Again, I suspect that you also mean
kilowatt-hours (kWh), in other words a certain number of kilowatts
sustained for a pewriod of an hour.

So there!
--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
Avenue Supplies, http://avenuesupplies.co.uk

Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:46:30 UTC, Mike Dodd
wrote:


Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day. Or
approx 1.4kW/hr, also what the OP stated. Together with a low-loss
distribution system to the water heaters that the OP stated, gives
1.4kw/hr (33kw/day) heating to the house.


The point being made was that the units were mixed - 1.4kW is the power
rating. He probably meant 33kWh (kilowatt-hours) per day, of course (1.4
x 24 isn't far off that).

The measurement of 1.4kW/hr is meaningless, as a watt is (simply) a
measure of power output, not total power - kilowatts *per hour* cannot
mean anything sensible here. Again, I suspect that you also mean
kilowatt-hours (kWh), in other words a certain number of kilowatts
sustained for a pewriod of an hour.

So there!

Agreed. Remind me to engage brain next time

The message
from Matt contains these words:

In windy weather it can produce 33kW per day.

kilowatt what?

Seconds?

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Mike Dodd wrote:

Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day. Or
approx 1.4kW/hr, also what the OP stated. Together with a low-loss
distribution system to the water heaters that the OP stated, gives
1.4kw/hr (33kw/day) heating to the house.

I think perhaps you need to brush up on your basic physics - your (and
the OP's) usage of kW makes no sense.

--
Grunff

The message
from Mike Dodd contains these words:

Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day.

Nope - still doesn't make sense. Do you reckon he means 33kW
continuously for a whole day - that'd be 792kWh.

Or perhaps it's 33 kWh in a day - that's an average of a little less
than 1.4kW continuously across a day.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

On 14 Mar 2006 12:51:17 -0800, wrote:

PS 33kWh = 33x 8p = £2.66. But the great majority of days it wont
produce anything like that.

It's generally accepted that commercial wind turbines generate between
1/4 and 1/3 of their rated capacity over a year.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

Grunff wrote:
Mike Dodd wrote:

Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day. Or
approx 1.4kW/hr, also what the OP stated. Together with a low-loss
distribution system to the water heaters that the OP stated, gives
1.4kw/hr (33kw/day) heating to the house.


I think perhaps you need to brush up on your basic physics - your (and
the OP's) usage of kW makes no sense.


As previous reply - yes, needed to engage brain. Sad thing is not just
basic physics but classically trained with E&E eng through Uni. Was too
eager to jump onto a non-value-added reply. You're quite right, though,
that original units were ambiguous / wrong. The basic premise, however,
that the OP wanted to heat his mother's water by 1.4kWhr all day should
still be obvious, and the link to the American website (pah!) with the
48v heater element still addresses the OP's query. "no sense" -
agreed, the details were incorrect, however, would not require a massive
leap of faith to understand and answer OP's question.

Mike Dodd wrote:
Grunff wrote:

I think perhaps you need to brush up on your basic physics - your (and
the OP's) usage of kW makes no sense.


As previous reply - yes, needed to engage brain.


Needless to say, I posted that before your reply to Bob had reached my
server - I wasn't just hammering the point home :-)


--
Grunff

"Guy King" wrote in message
...
The message
from Mike Dodd contains these words:

Huh?, thought that was pretty obvious from the OP - 33kW per day.

Nope - still doesn't make sense. Do you reckon he means 33kW
continuously for a whole day - that'd be 792kWh.

What do you think? What do you *really* think?

Or perhaps it's 33 kWh in a day - that's an average of a little less
than 1.4kW continuously across a day.

--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

On 14 Mar 2006 11:48:17 -0800, wrote:

My mum=B4s house, built 1974, has a conventional oil fired central
heating system which supplies hot water to a cylinder and radiators.
The house is in an area with very good wind resource. I want to install
a small wind turbine to supplement the oil fired heating system. The
wind turbine I wish to use has a maximum power output of 1.4kW. The DC
output voltage can be either 12v, 24v or 48v. In windy weather it can
produce 33kW per day.

I wonder what is the best way to tie the wind power into the central
heating system. I have considered the following possibilities:

1=2E Install a suitable low voltage 1.5kW water heater in or connected to
the cylinder. This should provide lots of hot water but no much thru
the radiators. Can you recomend a suitable water heater?

2=2E Install a suitable low voltage 1.5kW water heater on the cold water
input pipe to the boiler. Leave the boiler on low so that the pump will
circulate the water thru the radiators and cylinder. Can you recommend
a suitable water heater?

I would greatly appreciate any advice you may have.

Thanks in anticipation.

Use the wind turbine to power the lighting via a set of storage
batteries.

Use the electricity saved to run an immersion heater!

sponix

On 15 Mar 2006 03:10:47 -0800, wrote:

Does anyone have any views on how to tie the wind turbine into a
conventional oil fired central heating system?

It's not really viable to use a wind turbine for heating.

Use the turbine to generate electricity and use the money saved
onelectricity to put towards the oil bill.

sponix

I would greatly appreciate any advice you may have.

Spend what you would have spent on a wind turbine on insulation, draft
proofing and the construction of a porch. Then buy a windmill for 50p
from a toy shop, build a sandcastle in the back garden and plonk it in
the top.

As an alternative stick the money you would have spent on a wind
turbine in a high interest savings account.



--

In article , Sponix
writes
On 15 Mar 2006 03:10:47 -0800, wrote:

Does anyone have any views on how to tie the wind turbine into a
conventional oil fired central heating system?

It's not really viable to use a wind turbine for heating.

Use the turbine to generate electricity and use the money saved
onelectricity to put towards the oil bill.

sponix

Course if you don't need the leccy at the time either charge batteries
which is a lot of fuss 'n bother, or use it for water warming.

After all when the winds gone by, its gone;-)..........
--
Tony Sayer

On 14 Mar 2006 12:51:17 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

If you need heat, go with one of the solarthermal
techs that pays back properly, eg:
http://www.builditsolar.com/Projects...rn_project.htm

Fine for heating a barn, or indeed a one room house.

If the house concerned has more than one room then the hot air has
to be moved between the rooms somehow.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:
On 14 Mar 2006 12:51:17 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

If you need heat, go with one of the solarthermal
techs that pays back properly, eg:
http://www.builditsolar.com/Projects...rn_project.htm

Fine for heating a barn, or indeed a one room house.

If the house concerned has more than one room then the hot air has
to be moved between the rooms somehow.

Now theres what I call a challenge.


NT

On 15 Mar 2006 15:20:20 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

If the house concerned has more than one room then the hot air has
to be moved between the rooms somehow.

Now theres what I call a challenge.

I don't call it a challenge. However, doing this involves ductwork,
fans (probably) and control systems. What that means is that it is
not as simple as cutting a hole in the side of the house and what
that also means is that there are some costs and energy inputs to
consider.

Barns are (generally) different to houses.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:
On 15 Mar 2006 15:20:20 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

If the house concerned has more than one room then the hot air has
to be moved between the rooms somehow.

Now theres what I call a challenge.

I don't call it a challenge. However, doing this involves ductwork,
fans (probably) and control systems. What that means is that it is
not as simple as cutting a hole in the side of the house and what
that also means is that there are some costs and energy inputs to
consider.


Sorry, but this is nonsense.

1. Most houses do not have only one room with a south facing wall, it
is more normal to have 2 or 3 on one floor, and 2 on the other. That
makes 4-5 rooms heated directly, or about half of the house typically.

2. Even if no circulation at all were used, a solar panel could still
contribute over half the heating use.

3. Over half because there will be air mixing regardless of what you
do. Add the fact that any houses are open plan, in many the internal
doors get left open, and in many cases part of the south facing wall
supplies a corridor, and you're well over half. Patyback is of course
still good with less than 100% heating replacement.

4. Then add use of the comfort zone, the fact that the solar heater can
take those rooms up to 23 and still be comfortable. This temp diff will
cause heat movement from warm to cooler rooms.

Etc. The assertion that ducts are needed is a flying pig.


NT

On 16 Mar 2006 06:48:50 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

Sorry, but this is nonsense.

So you claim.

1. Most houses do not have only one room with a south facing wall, it
is more normal to have 2 or 3 on one floor, and 2 on the other. That
makes 4-5 rooms heated directly, or about half of the house typically.

That rather depends on the house. Many houses have no south facing
walls, as they are part of a terrace. If they do have south facing
walls then they may have the number of rooms you claim facing south,
but are more likely to have one room on the ground floor and one or
two on the upper floor. Perhaps a quarter of the house typically.

2. Even if no circulation at all were used, a solar panel could still
contribute over half the heating use.

Such panels could indeed heat any suitable rooms, in the right
weather. Whether that was over half the heating use or not depends
on the house, but I suspect it would be rather less than half for
nearly every house. A barn designed specifically for this form of
heating could manage more. Still I'm pleased we have now gone from
whole house heating to supplementary heating.

3. Over half because there will be air mixing regardless of what you
do.

One needs large volumes of air to convey the same amount of heat as
a small volume of water. That is why air ducts are large and heating
pipes small.

Add the fact that any houses are open plan, in many the internal
doors get left open,

To heat a room it is not enough to just leave the door open and hope
for the best. One would need a means of supplying warmed air to the
spaces concerned and removing the cooler air. One could design a
house around such a system, but it would be difficult to fit into an
existing house.

and in many cases part of the south facing wall
supplies a corridor, and you're well over half.

So you claim. I disagree for the reasons I gave above.

Etc. The assertion that ducts are needed is a flying pig.

Ditto.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:
On 16 Mar 2006 06:48:50 -0800 someone who may be
wrote this:-

1. Most houses do not have only one room with a south facing wall, it
is more normal to have 2 or 3 on one floor, and 2 on the other. That
makes 4-5 rooms heated directly, or about half of the house typically.

That rather depends on the house. Many houses have no south facing
walls, as they are part of a terrace.

and those are relevant?


Still I'm pleased we have now gone from
whole house heating to supplementary heating.

You can do either, but solar heat normally coexists with fuel heating
for obvious reasons.

Even a half dead person can work out how to circulate air without
running ducting.

If you want to learn about it alt.solar.thermal.


NT