I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg

On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, "dg" wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

The value is what people are prepared to pay. It has no connection
with the cost of the parts.

--
Frank Erskine

"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, "dg" wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

The value is what people are prepared to pay. It has no connection
with the cost of the parts.

It's also the cost of R&D. Try making your own - go on!

Mary

--
Frank Erskine

Mary Fisher wrote:
"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, "dg" wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

The value is what people are prepared to pay. It has no connection
with the cost of the parts.

It's also the cost of R&D. Try making your own - go on!

Mary

--
Frank Erskine

What R&D?

The motor seems to be some off the shelf model and the propeller, well
same as those on some 1850 farm bore hole.

The only thing to be 'developed' may well be the electronic box, but
that I presume would be a basic convertor circuit, again nothing new.

dg

Mary Fisher wrote:
"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, "dg" wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

The value is what people are prepared to pay. It has no connection
with the cost of the parts.

It's also the cost of R&D. Try making your own - go on!

Mary

--
Frank Erskine

What R&D?

The motor seems to be some off the shelf model and the propeller, well
same as those on some 1850 farm bore hole.

The only thing to be 'developed' may well be the electronic box, but
that I presume would be a basic convertor circuit, again nothing new.

dg

Mary Fisher wrote:
"Frank Erskine" wrote in message
...
On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, "dg" wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a
motor, on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for
a fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

The value is what people are prepared to pay. It has no connection
with the cost of the parts.

It's also the cost of R&D. Try making your own - go on!


http://www.britishwindenergy.co.uk/you/byo.html R&D already done.

dennis@home wrote:

http://www.britishwindenergy.co.uk/you/byo.html R&D already done.

There's a link on there to Hugh Piggott's site at

http://www.scoraigwind.com/index.htm

which is quite interesting (although not a model for good Web page
design). About half-way down the page there's a section headed "rooftop
wind turbines are a load of nonsense" - interesting that, coming, as it
does, from an obvious home-brew wind power enthusiast.

--
Andy

"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:

http://www.britishwindenergy.co.uk/you/byo.html R&D already done.

There's a link on there to Hugh Piggott's site at

http://www.scoraigwind.com/index.htm

which is quite interesting (although not a model for good Web page
design). About half-way down the page there's a section headed "rooftop
wind turbines are a load of nonsense" - interesting that, coming, as it
does, from an obvious home-brew wind power enthusiast.

Well you aren't going to get a decent flow of wind unless you put it on a
pole at least 2-3m above the roof.
You probably want 5+m.
People object to TV aerials on poles I suspect that they will treat wind
turbines the same way.

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 20:05:51 +0100, Mary Fisher wrote:

It's also the cost of R&D. Try making your own - go on!

Plenty of R&D has already been done on DIY wind turbines, and plenty of
plans on the net. Trouble is the effort probably isn't worth it for the
small outputs that you are going to get from an turbine you can construct
at home without specialist kit.

As I see it wind is not really the way to go. To get sensible outputs you
have to have huge devices(*) that on average only generate 1/3 to 1/4 of
their rated output over a year.

In the relative scheme of things as well not just the rotating jumbo jet
on a pole 2MW commercial turbines. Even a small 2kW "domestic" jobbie has
a rotor around 2.5m in diameter on top of pole at least 5m high. And note
that those powers are peak powers not what you'll actualy get most of the
time.

Small turbines with rotors less than 1m in dia generate no more than a
few hundred watts OK for battery charging on a boat when the boat isn't
in use but for a house not worth it. To put this in perspective, a 500W
or so wind turbine couldn't keep a large battery bank charged in the long
term to power 3 Cisco wireless bridges, a router and switch. And this was
on top of a hill with good exposure to strong winds...

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

On 2006-10-04 21:05:03 +0100, "Dave Liquorice" said:



Small turbines with rotors less than 1m in dia generate no more than a
few hundred watts OK for battery charging on a boat when the boat isn't
in use but for a house not worth it. To put this in perspective, a 500W
or so wind turbine couldn't keep a large battery bank charged in the
long term to power 3 Cisco wireless bridges, a router and switch. And
this was on top of a hill with good exposure to strong winds...

What did you do instead?

Andy Hall wrote:
On 2006-10-04 21:05:03 +0100, "Dave Liquorice" said:



Small turbines with rotors less than 1m in dia generate no more than a
few hundred watts OK for battery charging on a boat when the boat
isn't in use but for a house not worth it. To put this in perspective,
a 500W or so wind turbine couldn't keep a large battery bank charged
in the long term to power 3 Cisco wireless bridges, a router and
switch. And this was on top of a hill with good exposure to strong
winds...

What did you do instead?


Went bust I should think, or dug some cable...

Definitely micro windpower is a waste of time and fossil fuels.

You would be better off making a small steam engine and burning your
rubbish.

Hmm...that IS a thought actually..and an electric fan once it gets going
to 'turbocharge' the boiler..

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 21:05:03 +0100 (BST) someone who may be "Dave
Liquorice" wrote this:-

As I see it wind is not really the way to go. To get sensible outputs you
have to have huge devices(*) that on average only generate 1/3 to 1/4 of
their rated output over a year.

The uninformed might believe your statement indicates that there is
something different about wind turbines. However, it is a fact that
all forms of electricity generation do not produce 100% of their
rated output over a year.


--
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

The message
from David Hansen contains these words:

"Dave Liquorice" wrote this:-

As I see it wind is not really the way to go. To get sensible outputs you
have to have huge devices(*) that on average only generate 1/3 to 1/4 of
their rated output over a year.

Are you sure you are not being over generous? Even the propagandists
don't go that far:

"One 1.8 MW wind turbine at a reasonable site would produce over 4,7
million units of electricity each year"

I make that a load factor of only 0.3.

The uninformed might believe your statement indicates that there is
something different about wind turbines. However, it is a fact that
all forms of electricity generation do not produce 100% of their
rated output over a year.

Now that is a statement worthy of a religious fanatic.

There is indeed a crucial difference between wind power and conventional
forms of generation. That is that while wind power is completely at the
mercy of the wind conventional generation can when needed produce 100%
of its rated output on demand at all times except during downtime for
maintenance or repair.

--
Roger Chapman

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 09:25:19 +0100, David Hansen
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 21:05:03 +0100 (BST) someone who may be "Dave
Liquorice" wrote this:-

As I see it wind is not really the way to go. To get sensible outputs you
have to have huge devices(*) that on average only generate 1/3 to 1/4 of
their rated output over a year.

The uninformed might believe your statement indicates that there is
something different about wind turbines. However, it is a fact that
all forms of electricity generation do not produce 100% of their
rated output over a year.

Yes they can, It's purely a mathematical exercise as it depends on how
you rate them. Although not electricity generation related, the space
shuttle main engines can for instance can produce 109% of their rated
thrust.

The annual load factor on some UK coal/gas generation has certainly
been above 90%, and I'd hazard a guess that some nuclear generation
runs even higher - albeit in re-rated from the original design output
due to engineering considerations, also a great many hydro plants run
at as near as dammit 100%, the only time they are off the bars is for
statutory testing of overspeed devices etc.

--

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 09:25:19 +0100, David Hansen wrote:

The uninformed might believe your statement indicates that there is
something different about wind turbines. However, it is a fact that
all forms of electricity generation do not produce 100% of their
rated output over a year.

This is true but I expect most other sources are signifcantly above even
the generous 1/3 of rate output for a wind turbine. Also bear in mind
that this much reduced level is due mainly to there being not enough
wind, something that we can't control. Unlike essential maintenance for a
hydro, gas or coal station.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

On 2006-10-04 19:15:00 +0100, "dg" said:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg

They are not *valued* at £1500 at all. The price charged is what
they believe sufficient people will pay to justify the shelf space.
It also gives them plenty of room for manoeuvre when the inevitable
happens and they don't sell. They could probably knock 60% off the
price and still make a reasonable margin,

Also, AIUI, the price includes a survey and fitting.

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 19:45:15 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On 2006-10-04 19:15:00 +0100, "dg" said:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg

They are not *valued* at £1500 at all. The price charged is what
they believe sufficient people will pay to justify the shelf space.
It also gives them plenty of room for manoeuvre when the inevitable
happens and they don't sell. They could probably knock 60% off the
price and still make a reasonable margin,

Also, AIUI, the price includes a survey and fitting.

With the claims they are making, the things will sell. This "30%"
business, and having it injected straight into the house mains will
camoflage the failings of the things. Only when buyers notice no
difference in their electricity bills will the con be found out, and
far too late for those who bought. In the meantime, the racket from
them will be enjoyed by neighbours.

Nobody has commented on the "solar panels", a snip at "Only £2498.00".

On 2006-10-05 12:02:04 +0100, EricP said:

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 19:45:15 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On 2006-10-04 19:15:00 +0100, "dg" said:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg

They are not *valued* at £1500 at all. The price charged is what
they believe sufficient people will pay to justify the shelf space.
It also gives them plenty of room for manoeuvre when the inevitable
happens and they don't sell. They could probably knock 60% off the
price and still make a reasonable margin,

Also, AIUI, the price includes a survey and fitting.

With the claims they are making, the things will sell. This "30%"
business, and having it injected straight into the house mains will
camoflage the failings of the things. Only when buyers notice no
difference in their electricity bills will the con be found out, and
far too late for those who bought. In the meantime, the racket from
them will be enjoyed by neighbours.

It certainly will. They claim 33dBA at a wind speed of 5 m/s (11mph)
but 55dBA at 7 m/s (15mph) at 5m distance.

The latter will be highly audible. Conveniently, they don't say what
it will be at the rated speed of 12.5 m/s (28mph). 65dBA? 75?
Either way, one hell of a racket.

Hopefully customers will have a get out if neighbours complain or
planning departments intervene.


Nobody has commented on the "solar panels", a snip at "Only £2498.00".

That one's too much of a joke to even be considered.

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 11:02:04 GMT, EricP wrote:

Nobody has commented on the "solar panels", a snip at "Only £2498.00".

I stared at it in disbelief. I bought 2x 20 tube units recently at £400 per
panel. B&Q are having a laugh selling flat panels at that price.

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 11:02:04 GMT someone who may be EricP
wrote this:-

With the claims they are making, the things will sell. This "30%"
business, and having it injected straight into the house mains will
camoflage the failings of the things. Only when buyers notice no
difference in their electricity bills will the con be found out,

Any evidence to back up your assertion?


--
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

dg wrote:
I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg

dg wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q,

For a good web article on DIY that's about as DIY as it comes, read the
design and constructional details on building one from a Volvo 240
front strut
http://www.otherpower.com/trips1.html

"dg" wrote in message
ups.com...

... How much would the parts be?

Traditionally, you use the generator from an old bus and make the rest from
other bits of scrap.

Colin Bignell

"nightjar .uk.com" nightjar@insert my surname here wrote in message
...

"dg" wrote in message
ups.com...

... How much would the parts be?

Traditionally, you use the generator from an old bus and make the rest
from other bits of scrap.

If it's so easy I wonder why aren't people doing it ... or perhaps they are
and are keeping quiet about the results :-)

Mary

Colin Bignell

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
. net...

"nightjar .uk.com" nightjar@insert my surname here wrote in message
...

"dg" wrote in message
ups.com...

... How much would the parts be?

Traditionally, you use the generator from an old bus and make the rest
from other bits of scrap.

If it's so easy I wonder why aren't people doing it ... or perhaps they
are and are keeping quiet about the results :-)

Generating electricity from wind turbines is not difficult. Generating it
when you need it is more of a problem. The B&Q turbines rely upon mains
electricity as a backup. Using the mains supply as the secondary source used
to be a breach of most domestic electricity supply contracts and selling
domestically generated electricity to the generating companies was once
quite unheard of.

Colin Bignell

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 04:37:56 +0100, "nightjar" nightjar@insert my surname
here.uk.com wrote:

|
|"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
.net...
|
| "nightjar .uk.com" nightjar@insert my surname here wrote in message
| ...
|
| "dg" wrote in message
| ups.com...
|
| ... How much would the parts be?
|
| Traditionally, you use the generator from an old bus and make the rest
| from other bits of scrap.
|
| If it's so easy I wonder why aren't people doing it ... or perhaps they
| are and are keeping quiet about the results :-)
|
|Generating electricity from wind turbines is not difficult. Generating it
|when you need it is more of a problem. The B&Q turbines rely upon mains
|electricity as a backup. Using the mains supply as the secondary source used
|to be a breach of most domestic electricity supply contracts and selling
|domestically generated electricity to the generating companies was once
|quite unheard of.

Worse synchronising the turbine output with mains AC at the correct
frequency, phase etc, then adjusting the phase angle to feed power back
into the mains is **VERY** **VERY** difficult. If you do not understand
what I said above it is more or less impossible.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 04:37:56 +0100, "nightjar" nightjar@insert my surname
here.uk.com wrote:

|
|"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
.net...
|
| "nightjar .uk.com" nightjar@insert my surname here wrote in message
| ...
|
| "dg" wrote in message
| ups.com...
|
| ... How much would the parts be?
|
| Traditionally, you use the generator from an old bus and make the rest
| from other bits of scrap.
|
| If it's so easy I wonder why aren't people doing it ... or perhaps they
| are and are keeping quiet about the results :-)
|
|Generating electricity from wind turbines is not difficult. Generating it
|when you need it is more of a problem. The B&Q turbines rely upon mains
|electricity as a backup. Using the mains supply as the secondary source
used
|to be a breach of most domestic electricity supply contracts and selling
|domestically generated electricity to the generating companies was once
|quite unheard of.

Worse synchronising the turbine output with mains AC at the correct
frequency, phase etc, then adjusting the phase angle to feed power back
into the mains is **VERY** **VERY** difficult. If you do not understand
what I said above it is more or less impossible.

That was the primary reason why it was not permitted when I was in the
electricity supply industry. Loss of revenue was a secondary consideration,
although not a very important one in the days of Nationalisation. We were
capped at 2% profit and the main problem facing the accountants was making
sure we didn't go over that. They even cut prices to stay within the cap,
upon occasion.

Colin Bignell

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 06:13:52 +0100 someone who may be Dave Fawthrop
wrote this:-

Worse synchronising the turbine output with mains AC at the correct
frequency, phase etc, then adjusting the phase angle to feed power back
into the mains is **VERY** **VERY** difficult.

It *was* difficult in the days of manual control systems. However,
engineering has advanced and now it is very easy, simply a matter of
connecting the box between turbine and mains.


--
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

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 06:13:52 +0100, Dave Fawthrop wrote:

Worse synchronising the turbine output with mains AC at the correct
frequency, phase etc, then adjusting the phase angle to feed power back
into the mains is **VERY** **VERY** difficult.

No it's not. Bung it across the mains and it will sync *very* quickly,
probably to the detriment of part of your kit though depending on how far
out you are. B-)

Commercial boxes can be bought that do everything but these small
turbines generate so little power that that expense probably isn't
justified. So you then either have a LV battery supply and distribution
or some seperate mains via an invertor to seperate mains distribution.

Also the control box needs to fail safe. It *must* disconnect your
generated power from the mains when the mains fails but if you are
feeding the mains how does it know that the mains has failed?

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

dg wrote:
I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

Its a bit more than that, though not a huge amount. The motor has to be
a type that offers near zero starting torque, which rules most motors
out. It also has to be one where low speed can produce the wanted
output, which again rules many out. It also should preferably be PM
field to avoid losses, though there are some excited field gens around.


Standard PM field motors dont start effortlessly, so no off the shelf
motor satisfies all the requirements. However if you want to make a
no-cost compromise design, a car alternator is a fairly good choice.
The controllable field makes it more efficient at higher speeds, as you
can reduce excitation to reduce V_out. The downside is at low speeds a
significant amount of your output is simply supplying the field coils.


How are these valued at over £1500

theyre priced at 1500, the miniscule sales volume shows that theyre not
valued at 1500. The price comes from business costs, if you only sell
10 units a year you have to divide your total biz costs by 10 and add
that to the price of each unit sold.


when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

£50 should cover it. Car alternator, wood or metal for the prop, steel
pole, brake drum for the rotating mount, some control electronics,
tailfin assembly, overspeed brake, service brake, and rotatable power
conductor. There are lots of plans around for making them from scrap.


NT

wrote:
dg wrote:
I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

Its a bit more than that, though not a huge amount. The motor has to
be a type that offers near zero starting torque, which rules most
motors out. It also has to be one where low speed can produce the
wanted output, which again rules many out. It also should preferably
be PM field to avoid losses, though there are some excited field gens
around.

It looks like a standard 6 pole AC induction motor to me - the electronics
control box has to be powered externally so I suspect they're running a
speed controller with zero speed demand, which'd magnetise the motor enough
to regen back into the mains as the motor shaft moves.....

"dg" wrote:
I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg
-----------------------------------------------

It is one of the more difficult diy projects but you can definitely build
your own. There's lots of info on the net, e.g.,
http://www.britishwindenergy.co.uk/you/byo.html
Good luck!

On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, "dg" wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

dg

Navitron.org.uk
may be cheaper.
--
Get away from it all
http://www.travelfreebies.co.uk/thomson-holidays.htm
Late deals, mega cheap flights and bargains

On 4 Oct 2006 11:15:00 -0700, dg wrote:

I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

How are these valued at over £1500 when it seems it can be made for a
fraction of that? How much would the parts be?

They are priced at £1500, not valued at £1500. Similar turbines and control
packs can be bought for £900.

In article . com,
dg wrote:
I noticed a wind turbine in B&Q, and it is nothing more than a motor,
on a pole with a propellor and some box of electronics.

Why would you want to make wind?

--
*Lottery: A tax on people who are bad at math.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The message
from "Dave Plowman (News)" contains these words:

Why would you want to make wind?

It's that or bust.

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