Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
Passive structure design of “Wind Energizer” by Leviathan Energy reportedly increases wind turbine efficiency 30% in field tests.
Technological advancements in wind energy efficiency have generally come incrementally and usually made via a process of increasingly large wind turbine blades. Put simply, the model has been: longer blades = more output per turbine.
But that pattern of incremental improvements may be a thing of the past if Leviathan Energy has anything to say about it. Leviathan Energy has completed initial testing on their Wind Energizer unit and is reporting gains in wind turbine output in the ballpark of 30% — and as much as 150% at lower wind speeds.
The principle theory at work is that by placing passive objects around a wind farm it will change the circulation around a large wind turbine. The advancement is not in the turbine itself, but rather in the area around it, as such, units can be adapted to any wind turbine from any manufacturer.
“This is a disruptive technology,” Leviathan Energy CEO Dr. Daniel Farb told me via telephone from Israel last week. “We are changing the environment of the wind turbine; this is a very different approach.”
- » See also: Asia Light Years Ahead of the US in Clean Tech Investment — Financial and Economic Consequences
- » Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Farb is a bit of a modern day renaissance man. Trained as a medical doctor—an opthalmologist—he also has a business degree, and perhaps most importantly, a real determination to make innovations in renewable energy. “Sometimes people are able to develop ideas that other people that may have missed by taking a fresh perspective on something,” said Farb, whose team at Leviathan Energy also makes a vertical axis wind turbine and small hydroelectric turbines.
The Wind Energizer is a donut-shaped structure made from steel and plastic, but the exact dimensions of it depend on site-specific data, like the tower height, length of the blades, prevailing wind direction and intensity, etc. As determined in the customized modeling process, Farb said that the structure may not even make an entire circle (as is depicted in the images).
“We’re shaping the flow so that the highest velocities hit the blades. By increasing velocity at exactly the right point we’ve been able to make serious advances in the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy,” Dr. Farb explained.
In the initial phase of testing, Leviathan measured an average of 20-40% more output with the turbines using the Wind Energizer, as compared to the control units. At lower wind speeds (0-6 meters per second) the turbines with the Wind Energizer had gains as high as 150%.
Leviathan’s early testing has been conducted on a relatively small scale, using commercially-available small turbines with 3-meter blades. Farb told me that Leviathan is currently exploring opportunities for third-party testing and certification on a commercial scale wind farm.
>>See also : Leviathan Launches US Sales Effort for Wind Energizer
Leviathan estimates that the period of return on investment for the wind energizer to be about four to five years and that wind farm operators would likely see decreased maintenance costs and longer life span because the Wind Energizer balances the velocity load and shearing forces on the turbine.
“If this were implemented worldwide there is no quicker way to grow our renewable energy capacity,” Dr. Farb said.
And if the Wind Energizer performs as well on a large scale as it did on a smaller scale, he may be right.
If you want to learn more about the Wind Energizer, or any of Leviathan Energy’s other products, they will be at the American Wind Energy Association’s WINDPOWER 2009 conference and expo in Chicago next week.
Images courtesy of Leviathan Energy
Follow Tim Hurst on twitter
Why not plant a few layers of bushes/trees around the base? You could plant a dense layer of foliage and form a similarly shaped structure to direct wind into the blades…plus then there would be little land wastage - one could plant fruit trees and whatnot.
That’s a green solution I’d say.
Thank you all for your comments. Some responses to the comments:
PV;We already included that concept in one of our patents.
Optiwind construction is very different.
It could also work with vertical axis–but most large turbines are horizontal so that is the major application. We have used the concepts to make our own higher-performing vertical axis small turbine.
We did do economic analysis, and the ROI is often less than 3 years. Also, the picture shown is figurative.
Maintenance is a major problem and this can help it.
You can’t just build it of plywood for many reasons. One is that there are patent issues. Another is that if you are off by a small amount in the exact shape, you can decrease the power output.
Some farmers are glad to provide shade for their cows, and we will accommodate the farmer’s interests in its construction.
Maybe this will work for offshore, but onshore all of a sudden you find you can’t very easily farm the land under the skirt, and it turns what some people might describe as an eyesore in to a monstrosity. It reminds me of the bodywork modifications the youngsters around here make to their Vauxhall Novas and Citroen Saxos - it’s like ‘Pimp My Turbine’!
This would require more insatllation work aside from the turbine and would require larger real estate than simply increasing the size of blades or using more turbine blades. You’ll have to count the cost of both options. Count all the extra materials and the cost of the extra land enclosed by the skirt.
But this approach has proven what I have been suspecting all along. There is a spot in your house where the wind power can be maxed out. Or you can modify your house a little bit, such as building aesthetically designed skirt or facade so that the wind turbine atop your house would have increased efficiency.
Well, It sounds like a good idea. But as far as I recall the maximum wind shear should be no more than + - 8 percent. Otherwise there will be too much stress on the wind turbine.
Another issue is the turbulence created by the “wind energizer” if it is to be used in a wind farm. It might work for one wind turbine but causes trouble when you have more.
Anyway. They are probably smart people, so maybe they have another focus or have ways to get around the problems.
Keep up the good work guys! And thanks for helping save the planet.
This is really amazing!
I love technology that’s green and clean and that is what this post is all about.
but what it happen if the wind is not big enough to drive the blades?
Wow … maybe ultilities required by libtards to install wind power systems, will only need to install 5 megawatts of wind turbines per megawatt delivered, instead of 8 megawatts of turbines per megawatt delivered.
Of course, it’ll result in larger carbon footprints than burning coal … (since, every megawatt of green energy is currently backed up by nuclear or fossil fuels to account for their downtimes) … Way to go greenies!!!! Destroying the world, one ‘green’ power system at a time!
When you double the blade length you quadruple the power output.That is why bigger turbines are more effective.I agree that I have worries about excess stress on the blades at 6:00 o’clock versus 12:00 o’clock position.Hopefully more studies will show this works for all sizes.
This will help to improve smth. the shearing, that is to raise the speed at the bottom side of the rotor.But I think it need heavy structures to withstand the flow of the wind, a good slip surface not to be abrasively weared, etc. However experiments are good to be made. Perhaps exists places where the terrain is proper (tilt) to make such experiments..
You should just change the blade design from 3 to 4.My blade design works at 15 feet height.It does not get effected by houses or trees or other obstructions.In fact they help my design.Your blades are made for jet stream air forces,and mine are made for turbulent air,and that allows them to be set much much lower,and still produce more energy than an 60 foot tower with the skystream 3.7 mounted than my 2.2 KW at 15 feet.The blades are all wrong unless they are set at 150 feet plus.You can’t get permits to set something like that up for the average home owner.I live in a very big residential area,and in the thick of the city limits.I need no permit or any clearance,and I stood it up by myself in five minutes.No crane,no tower, and the thing cranks out power like a dream.