On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 21:45:08 GMT someone who may be EricP wrote this:-
I assume your assertion is to do with the engineering, rather then the science. If it is then there is rather a lot of cutting edge engineering in a number of fields in such devices. It is what has bought the cost per watt down so dramatically in the larger ones. Developments are continuing, examples being the ring around the Swift blades and various designs of vertical axis turbine that are being worked on.
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 00:07:11 +0000 someone who may be Peter Parry wrote this:-
Excellent, another personal attack.
Oh I know how lucky we are. Living close to centres of medical excellence are the main reason we stay here and not move to the Highlands or some other lonely northern place. When I had brain surgery (I've heard all the jokes!) it was in the unit which serves the North of England. some people came from Northumberland, I was within walking distance.
St James' ('Jimmy's' of tv fame) is the one we've frequented most recently this year, another huge new building is going up for cancer treatment, that will serve a large region too. Spouse was cared for at St James' when he had a heart attack, it was that which made us realise how fortunate we were. Short distance = speedy treatment, which is essential for some conditions.
St James' and the Leeds General Infirmary (the one in town) and the hospital at the bottom of our street where I go for breast cancer monitoring and the other Leeds hospitals are the teaching hospitals for the University of Leeds. I suspect that might be why they haven't been moved out - apart from being huge.
Mary
I hope you're keeping a tally, David :-)
Mary
>
Eh? Attack? It was simply an observation upon your apparent simplistic division of everything into pro and anti and inability to alter entrenched opinion in the face of facts. That isn't an attack.
Merely an accurate observation, perhaps. You certainly seem taken in by all the greenwash, almost to the point of obsession.
On 8 Nov 2006 16:08:09 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager" wrote this:-
Excellent, discussing another poster rather then the subject. Usually the resort of those with no better arguments.
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 15:45:01 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-
I paint a badge on the wall as I defeat each attack:-)
My reading of the B&Q leaflet was they didn't feed back, just reduce your own consumption from the grid.
Well, there are very many round here who seem determined to knock everything David says - with no supporting evidence.
In a way that's fair enough although I do wonder why they do it. Calling people offensive names does their cause no good at all though. It says more about them than the subject of their childish name-calling.
By the way, what is accurate about 'dim' and 'pillock' in this context?
Mary
You must live in a big house!
Mary
RSPCA? As selling the system involves a site survey to see if the property is suitable , presumably for both installation and functioning, then they won't want the cost of doing it if a large number turn out to be a waste of time.
Installation could be interesting. They put it up and stand there with the customer saying 'it'll be OK once the wind starts blowing!'
I think everybody here would agree it's a good thing if the investment is sound, and that's the problem.
The survey covers installation only unless the site is obviously inadequate (such as surrounded by 100ft Leylandi) and this wasn't picked up on the initial telephone call. The effectiveness calculation is based simply upon the DTI calculator.
For most people that's exactly what will happen, for months on end.
It would be a good thing if they even worked - for most they won't. What I object to is the dishonest way they are marketed giving the false impression they will do far more than they ever can.
The sales pitch relies upon the quasi religious "we all have to do something" even if "something" is useless or more damaging than doing nothing. Anyone suggesting there should be some evidence they work, that performance graphs should be published and mentioning that the emperor has no clothes is derided as an "anti" (the objective arguments are of course ignored).
80% of the UK population live in cities and towns of over 10,000 people. For almost all these windmills at roof height will never generate enough electricity to cover their manufacturing energy never mind be an "investment" because there is insufficient stable wind for them to work at even minimal levels.Of the remaining 20% of the population over half live in villages still with significant surface roughness. That leaves about 10% of the population who _might_ be able to benefit from a windmill. However about half of these live in sheltered areas (rural houses tend to be built where there is shelter and they are out of the wind) so the realistic market for these things is about 5% of the UK population. B&W and Windsave are trying to say the things will work almost anywhere, are quoting a completely irrelevant "average windspeed for the UK" figure and are using a calculator that is inadequate for the purpose they are using it for.
For those few that fit it to their house if there is sufficient wind for it to work they will discover it causes vibration, noise and damage to the wall. That's why all the authorities on the subject, throughout the world, say they need to go on masts and be some way from the property.
Only greenwashers have the brass neck and inherent dishonesty to try to get away with deception on this scale.
I think it is easier to implement by having a compliant (uk g83) grid tied inverter to "spill" surplus electricity into the grid. Otherwise you need to divert the excess to a resistive load (not a bad thing IMO) or store it in batteries (who's cost is greater per kWhr of storage than the value of the electricity when a grid connect is available). So even though it's not mentioned and you may not be credited for any surplus it is still cheaper to let the grid be a sink.
I'd still quite like to see the terms of use for this device when connected to the grid.
AJH
On the odd few occasions I've wandered into their dimly lit premises I have always left with the impression that B&Q are staffed by monkeys - untrained ones at that.
They don't move fast enough for monkeys.
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:32:06 GMT someone who may be Tony Bryer wrote this:-
There is some more information on the Windsave web site, should you wish to peruse it, including this, "The Windsave small wind turbine generating system (SWTGS) is an environmentally friendly 'renewable energy' device that is 'wind powered' and generates electricity synchronous with mains supply. The generated electricity is fed into the building's ring main supply at 230 VoltAC, 50Hertz."
But no further AIUI? Which means that on a windy night with nothing is using electricity except a TV on standby, CH programmer and clock radio, virtually all the electricity generated is wasted?
case to do something useful - heat water or heat a storage heater, ir charge your electic car!
Andy
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:08:23 GMT someone who may be Tony Bryer wrote this:-
No, the electricity is fed into the external system where it powers other things.
Depending on who the turbine owner is dealing with they will get paid for the electricity they generate and they may also aggregate things like ROCs.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.