5 ms·
According to the company: - It's cheaper per KWh (they claim 40%, IIRC, but that was in 2015) - It requires less maintenance (no moving parts) - It doesn't k
by dbrgn 7y ago
According to the company:
- It's cheaper per KWh (they claim 40%, IIRC, but that was in 2015)
- It requires less maintenance (no moving parts)
- It doesn't kill birds
- It's silent (no frequencies >20 Hz)
- It's 30% less efficient than a blade design but you can put twice as many in the same area
- It doesn't cause the alternating light/shadow effects that huge blades do
- bnegreve 7y ago> It requires less maintenance (no moving parts) They are no rotating parts, but some parts are moving. see here: https://vortexbladeless.com/technology-design/ https://vortexbladeless.com/technology-design/
- barbegal 7y agoI'm skeptical about the cheaper per KWh. A 100W conventional turbine can be purchased for around $200 and has 3 blades around 50 cm in length. The 100W vortex device is 2.7m tall and I doubt can be purchased for less than $600 since the structure is much wider and weighs around 3 times more. 14kg vs 5kg for a conventional turbine. A 100W conventional turbine also only has a couple of moving parts, won't kill birds and is effectively silent. I'm unsure on wether these claims are still true as the device scales up. A device 100m or so tall will have a fast velocity at the tip perhaps as much as 50m/s at a few Hz which is similar to the blade tip speed of a conventional turbine thus having similar potential to kill birds and make noise.
- einpoklum 7y agoWhile I also doubt their claims - the price you want to look at is : (purchase + installation) / average_life_span + maintenance per time unit So, even at triple the cost it could still be worthwhile.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago> It's silent (no frequencies >20 Hz) I hope there also isn't much noise below 20 Hz, as infrasounds are uncomfortable and potentially dangerous.