Robert Fiske

I don't agree. But then, I'm not saying these and the various flying approaches to windpower are supposed to be a silver bullet, either. I just think they have some very real advantages over the massive planted systems we are using predominantly today.

There would surely be more complexity than their test shows, with a few guys and a truck or two.. but if you look at the sheer volume of fixed materials dedicated to present-day windfarms, I think these would have a lot less than them, and the many flexibilities that fixed towers do not.

A key operational savings is the ability to bring the generator and all components right to ground as a matter of course, so that inspections and maintenance work don't require multi-skilled crews working at perilous heights with intensely expensive custom cranes and ships. The hourly costs for that work cut deeply into today's windpower's net gains. There will be a materials tradeoff, since these and almost any of the flying generating platforms will be composed of a number of materials that will likely have high wear, and so a short replacement cycle, such as the tethers, but I would suspect this could still come out way ahead of the massive undertakings involved in today's gearbox replacements, etc, on the big towers.

Many of the points you suggested are long-since solved, and really not additional complications, like left- and right-turning impellers, distribution cabling, ground structures.. they are additional to the basic flying equipment. The idea that the hangars would have to be automated, while not really even an unthinkable proposition these days, is also not likely. I don't assume these flying windfarms are supposed to be crewless.. It could be there is a basic running crew, and additional hands are called in if there are coming storms, etc.. but I don't think this has to be robots just because it's modern. I want to see this industry create some new kinds of jobs.

In any case, and not to argue too much, I also don't claim that this approach is baked in the cake (ie, perfect, wonderful and inevitable). Just that it has some real attractions, as I've mentioned. I agree that Helium would be a serious challenge.. though the more appealing designs I've liked have all been the 'tethered glider' types, not requiring lifting gases, and much easier to store low and tight in smaller structures.. and I would also hope that hydrogen could be an option as well, since it could well be generated using power from the turbines at the site, if necessary, given some water availability as well.. of course.

Regards,
Bob

C. Letellier; That is a strange demand.. Really, all it needs is a 'good' value. why insist on such extremes and say that only the 'best' is going to be worth anything?

As the video expresses, and we've seen with many of the proposed flying windpower solutions, there is steadier and far more powerful wind up at these heights, and in just countless locations. The considerable reduction in fixed infrastructure needed (mostly concrete and steel), and the ability to land these at will, whether for maintenance, for weather that would damage them, air traffic emergencies, or even to park them during dry seasons in order to avert operating costs make this technology possibly very attractive in its sheer flexibility. Add to that the ability to relocate individual or groups of these for any reasons, emergency power, seasonal migratory passage, changing weather patterns, providing boosts to weak points on the grid (??), support for temporary power needs such as construction environments or research facilities.. and this could be a terrific new direction for windpower to move towards, without the gargantuan fields of heavy equipment presently being deployed.

That doesn't mean, however, that there isn't also some good potential for using the power of big storm systems to help us, right where these weather events are also hurting us. But that is hardly their only place of usefulness. It's A point. Not THE point.

RRF

D. Logan;
Have you tried simply building with more collector area?

I have not yet put together a finished oven, so I'm not pretending I know the answer, but when I look at all the cardboard and tinfoil plans out there, I go out on recycling day and score a few more of those chipped, 1'x4' mirrors that are always on one sidewalk or another, and at some point, I will start framing them up, and pointing them at a 'box' until I see some temps I can work with. Like any solar, I have to think it's just a numbers game, ultimately just adding more surface area than one would initially expect.

I've gutted an old microwave for my future oven, BTW, and will be focusing my mirrors (which are bendable, so they will each get focused down to about a 1' patch) on the sheet metal at the rear and underside of this oven, mounting it onto a rolling BBQ grill frame for convenient work height and portability. The mirrors will store on the cart, but be set up on a stand just north of the Oven, where they will track the sun with an arduino or similar micro-control circuit. Finally, the oven will have some baffles that fold open so you aren't getting blinded or flashed by the mirror array.

That's the plan for now, anyway. I'm currently building a custom cellulose blower and will have to wait for the bake projects..

Paul;
As you're chewing over options regarding a greenhouse, consider this. The 'chinese' greenhouses that get a bit of play on the internet now have an insulated and massy north wall and roof, and over the glazing of the south side, they also install a deployable EXTERIOR insulation cover that can go far (as far as you can make it thick) towards conserving that precious heat through the nights and storms. In a high altitude setting like you are considering, I wouldn't think twice about including such a feature, which would also be able to serve as a variable shade-system against overheating, and as a protective shield for preserving the glazing against extreme elements.

Sharing a wall with the house seems extremely prudent, provided you remain constantly aware of the different humidity needs of those spaces, and design barriers and air/humidity handling tools with that in mind.

I suspect we will see many more people working out variants on the HRV and ERV systems, as we continue to get better educated on tight houses, indoor air quality, ventilation, oxygen levels, humidity, etc.. I've got a stockpile of aluminum sheeting awaiting some experimentation on homebuilt heat/exchangers and 'condensers'.. but other items are higher on the list today.

Hi; First post at Permies;

We built a house in 1980 with an Earth Tube.. a brilliant (and ancient) concept, and it was off to a fine start, but had some key errors that required addressing.. and before we could do it there was a divorce and several graduations and relocations.. ah well! Just the same, I feel that the energy available from the ground a scant few feet beneath our feet is far too great to ignore or shrug off. It does, however, require a renewed attention to the engineering realities that have been brought up.

Key to all this for me is that we make a very similar mistake with all our household mechanical systems, and build them into the house-system with 'nails, glue and rivets', so to speak, as if they were permanent fixtures not requiring the kind of modular accessibility that we take for granted in our cars and our computers. I want all the moving parts and the flows in my house attached with screws or bolts, and routed through dedicated mechanical access channels which will allow me and future owners to inspect, maintain, repair and replace these vital conduits whenever necessary via access hatches, not with shovels and jackhammers. I don't pretend that moving our current design expectations to such a standard would be easy, quick or cheap.. but I do think that this goal is well worth moving towards, and every step I take on that route has convinced me that it is.

I do appreciate the ancient wisdom that we've inherited with classic building tools and materials.. but with Plumbing, Air Handling, Electricity, Communications and Heating/Cooling Systems, there is just too much tech development and system maintenance involved to bury these things 'permanently' behind plaster or under a slab. With so many of our energy and mechanical systems, we have hidden and shushed everything like they were back in the servants passages of the old days, and tried to live like these tools and forces ('energy slaves'.. as sometimes described) were best kept invisible and inaudible, hardly touching our awareness, at best.

Sorry for the soapboxing.. but the point for me with this topic is that these earth-tubes should be re-installed and rethought a bit, basically as others have said, with an eye towards that accessibility (and with the micro tech we have now, 'pipe pigs' for cleaning isn't a bad idea, really.).. and the proper designing of drainage, and I'd say a good bit more surface area/air-volume, within soils that you can also Insulate to whatever degree is possible, but without sacrificing a good thermal mass of soils in the process. Yes, it would be a 'lot', a helluva lot even.. and will certainly be called out as uneconomical under conventional building cost expectations.. but I think the long-term value of such a system would regain all of the investment, as big a hump as it would be to hurdle initially.

Lawton's video on the greenhouse in Canada, which put their Annual Geothermal EarthTubes right under the core of the slab makes great sense to me, while that system also reheats the soils in the summertime with the solar gain of the greenhouse as well... ideally I would just have also kept an access hole at each end of the tube-trench, if not made a cellar trench that ran alongside these pipes, in order to be able to access this key mechanical system into the future. As with many renewable type systems, the startup costs might seem simply ridiculous to consider.. but taking the longest view you can, thinking of 'redigging' .. as you now must weigh into your own plans.. and similar barriers to fixing and improving an installed system, I have to suggest that it would be the right thing to work towards, no matter what today's beancounters will say.