▲ 46 ▼ How much power can a 1kW wind turbine produce for your home? - Engadget (www.engadget.com) submitted 2 weeks ago by supersquirrel@lemmy.ca to c/energy@slrpnk.net 28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Fiery@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 2 weeks ago (10 children) I'm guessing about 1kW permalink fedilink source hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) The article claims 200W average. The 1kW is to deal with gusts. That's also assuming perfect mounting conditions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] credo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago Well, how much if I mount it? I have some experience hanging pictures. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children) 200Wh average per month, or 0.27Wh. Is my math wrong or is that absolute garbage? A desktop solar panel could compete Edit: yeah my math is garbage, solar is better (under certain conditions), but not 50,000x better permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) It would be closer to 4.8kWh/day. That is assuming a strong steady wind. Real world conditions would take a significant cut. Cut windspeed in half with clutter (trees, buildings etc) and you're down to 0.6kWh/day. Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. Anything between late october and early march? I can't be arsed to find it again, but there's a company that does solar installs in my country (which to me sounds like they'd be the last people to downplay solar's capabilities) and they have production statistics from some of their installations on their website. I checked out a couple and May or June tended to be about 30x higher than December. I think May was actually the peak production month which in hindsight makes sense because in June the midday sun is really high in the sky and the morning and evening are somewhat more north than you'd normally get so they don't give you much extra. December, meanwhile, gets about an hour of useful sunlight a week. This is only around 60 degrees north too, it's gonna be worse for anyone that lives in an actually northern area. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago In the UK it's apparently around 4-5x better in summer. That's a bit situation dependent. However, even at 10x, solar still competes well with wind. A useful turbine is still over 10x the cost of an equivalent winter output of solar panels. The only advantage they have is space efficiency. However, if space is that much of a premium, then it's likely messing up low altitude wind as well. It's also worth noting that solar panels are effectively a rock that makes electricity. Wind turbines have moving parts. They can ice up, and have to shut down in winter storms. I would love wind to be a viable home companion to home solar, but the maths just doesn't add up. It's amazing at grid scale, but crap at home scale. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago Right I'm an idiot, it should have stuck out to me that I was dividing by time twice. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bigfish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children) Per hour permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago Divided by not wind. permalink fedilink source parent [–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago Do you mean kwh/h? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cynar@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (6 children) The article claims 200W average. The 1kW is to deal with gusts. That's also assuming perfect mounting conditions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] credo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago Well, how much if I mount it? I have some experience hanging pictures. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children) 200Wh average per month, or 0.27Wh. Is my math wrong or is that absolute garbage? A desktop solar panel could compete Edit: yeah my math is garbage, solar is better (under certain conditions), but not 50,000x better permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) It would be closer to 4.8kWh/day. That is assuming a strong steady wind. Real world conditions would take a significant cut. Cut windspeed in half with clutter (trees, buildings etc) and you're down to 0.6kWh/day. Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. Anything between late october and early march? I can't be arsed to find it again, but there's a company that does solar installs in my country (which to me sounds like they'd be the last people to downplay solar's capabilities) and they have production statistics from some of their installations on their website. I checked out a couple and May or June tended to be about 30x higher than December. I think May was actually the peak production month which in hindsight makes sense because in June the midday sun is really high in the sky and the morning and evening are somewhat more north than you'd normally get so they don't give you much extra. December, meanwhile, gets about an hour of useful sunlight a week. This is only around 60 degrees north too, it's gonna be worse for anyone that lives in an actually northern area. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago In the UK it's apparently around 4-5x better in summer. That's a bit situation dependent. However, even at 10x, solar still competes well with wind. A useful turbine is still over 10x the cost of an equivalent winter output of solar panels. The only advantage they have is space efficiency. However, if space is that much of a premium, then it's likely messing up low altitude wind as well. It's also worth noting that solar panels are effectively a rock that makes electricity. Wind turbines have moving parts. They can ice up, and have to shut down in winter storms. I would love wind to be a viable home companion to home solar, but the maths just doesn't add up. It's amazing at grid scale, but crap at home scale. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago Right I'm an idiot, it should have stuck out to me that I was dividing by time twice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] credo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago Well, how much if I mount it? I have some experience hanging pictures. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children) 200Wh average per month, or 0.27Wh. Is my math wrong or is that absolute garbage? A desktop solar panel could compete Edit: yeah my math is garbage, solar is better (under certain conditions), but not 50,000x better permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) It would be closer to 4.8kWh/day. That is assuming a strong steady wind. Real world conditions would take a significant cut. Cut windspeed in half with clutter (trees, buildings etc) and you're down to 0.6kWh/day. Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. Anything between late october and early march? I can't be arsed to find it again, but there's a company that does solar installs in my country (which to me sounds like they'd be the last people to downplay solar's capabilities) and they have production statistics from some of their installations on their website. I checked out a couple and May or June tended to be about 30x higher than December. I think May was actually the peak production month which in hindsight makes sense because in June the midday sun is really high in the sky and the morning and evening are somewhat more north than you'd normally get so they don't give you much extra. December, meanwhile, gets about an hour of useful sunlight a week. This is only around 60 degrees north too, it's gonna be worse for anyone that lives in an actually northern area. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago In the UK it's apparently around 4-5x better in summer. That's a bit situation dependent. However, even at 10x, solar still competes well with wind. A useful turbine is still over 10x the cost of an equivalent winter output of solar panels. The only advantage they have is space efficiency. However, if space is that much of a premium, then it's likely messing up low altitude wind as well. It's also worth noting that solar panels are effectively a rock that makes electricity. Wind turbines have moving parts. They can ice up, and have to shut down in winter storms. I would love wind to be a viable home companion to home solar, but the maths just doesn't add up. It's amazing at grid scale, but crap at home scale. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago Right I'm an idiot, it should have stuck out to me that I was dividing by time twice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children) It would be closer to 4.8kWh/day. That is assuming a strong steady wind. Real world conditions would take a significant cut. Cut windspeed in half with clutter (trees, buildings etc) and you're down to 0.6kWh/day. Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. Anything between late october and early march? I can't be arsed to find it again, but there's a company that does solar installs in my country (which to me sounds like they'd be the last people to downplay solar's capabilities) and they have production statistics from some of their installations on their website. I checked out a couple and May or June tended to be about 30x higher than December. I think May was actually the peak production month which in hindsight makes sense because in June the midday sun is really high in the sky and the morning and evening are somewhat more north than you'd normally get so they don't give you much extra. December, meanwhile, gets about an hour of useful sunlight a week. This is only around 60 degrees north too, it's gonna be worse for anyone that lives in an actually northern area. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago In the UK it's apparently around 4-5x better in summer. That's a bit situation dependent. However, even at 10x, solar still competes well with wind. A useful turbine is still over 10x the cost of an equivalent winter output of solar panels. The only advantage they have is space efficiency. However, if space is that much of a premium, then it's likely messing up low altitude wind as well. It's also worth noting that solar panels are effectively a rock that makes electricity. Wind turbines have moving parts. They can ice up, and have to shut down in winter storms. I would love wind to be a viable home companion to home solar, but the maths just doesn't add up. It's amazing at grid scale, but crap at home scale. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago Right I'm an idiot, it should have stuck out to me that I was dividing by time twice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child) Basically there is almost nowhere that wind wins over solar. At least at consumer scale. Anything between late october and early march? I can't be arsed to find it again, but there's a company that does solar installs in my country (which to me sounds like they'd be the last people to downplay solar's capabilities) and they have production statistics from some of their installations on their website. I checked out a couple and May or June tended to be about 30x higher than December. I think May was actually the peak production month which in hindsight makes sense because in June the midday sun is really high in the sky and the morning and evening are somewhat more north than you'd normally get so they don't give you much extra. December, meanwhile, gets about an hour of useful sunlight a week. This is only around 60 degrees north too, it's gonna be worse for anyone that lives in an actually northern area. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] cynar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago In the UK it's apparently around 4-5x better in summer. That's a bit situation dependent. However, even at 10x, solar still competes well with wind. A useful turbine is still over 10x the cost of an equivalent winter output of solar panels. The only advantage they have is space efficiency. However, if space is that much of a premium, then it's likely messing up low altitude wind as well. It's also worth noting that solar panels are effectively a rock that makes electricity. Wind turbines have moving parts. They can ice up, and have to shut down in winter storms. I would love wind to be a viable home companion to home solar, but the maths just doesn't add up. It's amazing at grid scale, but crap at home scale. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] cynar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago In the UK it's apparently around 4-5x better in summer. That's a bit situation dependent. However, even at 10x, solar still competes well with wind. A useful turbine is still over 10x the cost of an equivalent winter output of solar panels. The only advantage they have is space efficiency. However, if space is that much of a premium, then it's likely messing up low altitude wind as well. It's also worth noting that solar panels are effectively a rock that makes electricity. Wind turbines have moving parts. They can ice up, and have to shut down in winter storms. I would love wind to be a viable home companion to home solar, but the maths just doesn't add up. It's amazing at grid scale, but crap at home scale. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] klankin@piefed.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago Right I'm an idiot, it should have stuck out to me that I was dividing by time twice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bigfish@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children) Per hour permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 weeks ago Divided by not wind. permalink fedilink source parent [–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago Do you mean kwh/h? permalink fedilink source parent