Archimedes - most efficient wind turbine?

The Archimedes is a new windmill design meant to power small homes and apartments. With an 80 percent efficiency ratio.



According to the creators, the device is designed to provide enough electricity to power an apartment or small home. “The Liam F1 generates an average of 1,500 kilowatt-hours of energy [per year] at a wind-speed of 5 m/s [16.4 ft/s], which resembles half of the power consumption of a common household.” The Liam can even adjust to wind direction, which enables it to maximize power generation even with changing conditions.

The Liam is priced at Eur 3,999 or about US$ 5,450 and will start retailing by July 1st.

More details here.

Very pretty but I would rather have a one ( or even two )50% efficent that only cost 300 € . I think effeciency is a red herring its cost per Kw/hr that counts .

David

David Livingston wrote:Very pretty but I would rather have a one ( or even two )50% efficient that only cost 300 € . I think efficiency is a red herring its cost per Kw/hr that counts .

David

I agree. Though there might be other factors, like vibration, noise etc.

The Liam can even adjust to wind direction

All wind turbines adjust to wind direction (or don't need to). They try to make that sound like an accomplishment, not a good sign. Nor is the picture with a tall building behind it.

Thank You Kindly,
Topher

p.s. kWh (that is kiloWatts * Hours) please. Not kiloWatt / Hours.

I do wish people would stop calling this a new design. Its a mass production of a very clever man who really should be acknowledged for his work.

It looks nice and small, but the price seems to be a bit over the top.

Here's a video about the inventor and the development:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om8vBG-jlnM

I've embedded that.

At today's prices, 1500 KWH is worth about $225. $225/$5500 is a very poor return on investment.

I wonder if the same gain in EROEI and ROCE seen in larger turbines is true of this design? 'Standard' small turbines such as those typically found upon buildings represent a pretty poor return on investment too.

David Livingston wrote:
Very pretty but I would rather have a one ( or even two )50% efficent that only cost 300 € . I think effeciency is a red herring its cost per Kw/hr that counts .

and there is a certain beauty in efficiency, no doubt? Also do you know of some- 595$'ers that run at 50%? Have you used them? Link?

R Hasting wrote:At today's prices, 1500 KWH is worth about $225. $225/$5500 is a very poor return on investment.

At today's prices.

Yeah

And hows burning all that sloppy carbon, elder nuke plants, and damned waterways working for us?

Methane bubbles in the Arctic and permafrost sinkholes?

I thought so

Burra,

I love it. If it last forever or its has a design that is easily and cheaply serviced I'd totally Lay of 6,000$ Grand.

6000$ Grand

"Here's electricity for the rest of your life"

Okay. Done.

Signed,

Me

Now I better start saving up some money.



Edit: fun with text

Landon Sunrich wrote:

David Livingston wrote:
Very pretty but I would rather have a one ( or even two )50% efficent that only cost 300 € . I think effeciency is a red herring its cost per Kw/hr that counts .

and there is a certain beauty in efficiency, no doubt? Also do you know of some- 595$'ers that run at 50%? Have you used them? Link?

I have used many, built many. Here's at least one option, you can find many more via google: http://www.homedepot.com/p/Sunforce-400-Watt-12-Volt-Wind-Turbine-44444

Landon Sunrich wrote:

R Hasting wrote:At today's prices, 1500 KWH is worth about $225. $225/$5500 is a very poor return on investment.

At today's prices.

Yeah

And hows burning all that sloppy carbon, elder nuke plants, and damned waterways working for us?

Methane bubbles in the Arctic and permafrost sinkholes?

I thought so

Burra,

I love it. If it last forever or its has a design that is easily and cheaply serviced I'd totally Lay of 6,000$ Grand.

6000$ Grand

"Here's electricity for the rest of your life"

Okay. Done.

Signed,

Me

Now I better start saving up some money.

Edit: fun with text

You can produce the same amount of energy a year with $400 worth of solar power: http://sunelec.com

$400 of solar and a $500 50% turbine, you'd have all you need for a fraction of the cost.

But solar panels don't spin and look cool.

George Hayduke wrote:But solar panels don't spin and look cool.

That's true, but they are a heck of a lot more reliable.

The first hail storm you get and your wind generator is out of service.

Can anyone tell me what 16 ft per second equals to in miles per hour?

wayne fajkus wrote:Can anyone tell me what 16 ft per second equals to in miles per hour?

I love google!

Here's an online converter - Feet per second to miles per hour converter

And it seems to think that 16 ft per second is 10.9 mph.

I just wonder if anyone worked into the EROEI of taking the thing down every three years and replacing the bearings in the gearbox plus the energy to make the bearings in the first place ? Siemens are having awefull trouble with theirs . Bearings are the achillies heel of ALL wind turbines .

The payback for solar is about 6-7 years give or take.(depending on many factors) The warranty is usually 25 years.
The payback for this wind turbine is two decades or more with only a 15 year warranty. I don’t see it selling very well. The material cost for this device should only be a few hundred dollars. It seems this company is either poorly managed or is out to make a killing on ill informed consumers.