The Picard ManeuverSometimes we have to create our own problems.
Rooskie91If you’re describing nearly free and unlimited electricity as a problem, you may want to reconsider some things.
It’s a very capitalist way of thinking about the problem, but what “negative prices” actually means in this case is that the grid is over-energised. That’s a genuine engineering issue which would take considerable effort to deal with without exploding transformers or setting fire to power stations
pelespiritHome owned windmills, solar panels and battery storage solves that.
Edit: Look at this awesome diagram of how it’s done for a hybrid setup that’s about $400 on Amazon.
Home owned windmills are almost a total waste. Its surprising how little electricity they generate especially given how much the cost to buy and install. Some real numbers. A 400w can cost almost $18k to buy and install. A 410w solar solar panel is about $250 + $3k of supporting electronics and parts. And that same $3k can support 10+ more panels. I looked into it myself really wanted it to be worth it for home, but it just isn’t. Now utility grade wind? Absolutely worth it. You need absolutely giant windmills with massive towers, but once you have those, you can make a LOT of electricity very cost effectively.
Solar panels worth it? Yes. Absolutely.
Batteries, not quite there yet for most folks. Batteries are really expensive, and don’t hold very much electricity $10k-$15k can get you a few hours of light or moderate home use capacity. For folks with really expensive electricity rates or very unreliable power this can be worth it financially, but for most every else. Cheaper chemistry batteries are finally starting to be produced (Sodium Ion), but we’re right at the beginning of these and there not really any consumer products for home made from these yet.
Oh yeah, super expensive. /s
www.amazon.com/dp/B087BY2YV7/?
The first link that came up: www.bobvila.com/…/best-home-wind-turbines/
knightly the SneptaurDid you not look at the specs on that product? It only produces energy when winds are above 7mph and don’t actually hit the rated output unless the winds are almost 35mph.
Less than a quarter the country averages an amount of wind power per square meter equivalent to the rating on home turbines (yellow and red on this map), and that’s only on average.
Compare to this map of average insolation, showing that solar power per square meter is at least 3x as high as wind energy for the same area and at most over 7x:
It’s a hybrid solar and wind. Also, that’s why you have batteries for storage.
Why not skip the middleman and go straight solar, then?
For places like Seattle.
Look at Seattle and tell me which parts have enough wind power for your turbine:
(Hint: nobody lives there)
The low wind needed to operate this wind turbine is great for people trying to live off-grid or camping. With stronger winds, the wind turbine can produce more power for your home or trailer. However, the manufacturer recommends not to use this turbine in areas that have turbulent wind conditions often. Source: houseandbeyond.org/best-home-wind-turbine
Which part of Seattle is that 😇
I’m joshin ya! Curious though if there’s evidence parent commenter was wrong
It’s incredibly well known that wind power completely depends on how large of an area you can cover with the blades. That’s why wind turbines keep getting bigger and bigger. They’re more efficient and deliver more energy. Roof mounted wind turbines for residential are one of the worst possible renewable energy sources for general consumers. You’re better off with solar or geothermal.
Like someone else said, a single solar panel can outcompete a roof mounted wind turbine. You’d be better off buying a portable camping solar panel and using that to charge a battery bank and then charge some of your electronics off of that.