<<< Wind Energy Skyscrapers >>>

For discussion of structural innovations ranging from 3D Honeycomb to genomic and self-generating formal systems. All welcome.

Wind power generation on skyscrapers - drawing examples

Postby JWmHarmon » Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:29 am

Eco-geek offers 10 skyscrapers using ecologically friendly designs including wind power generation.

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/695/

1.The Bahrain World Trade Center Towers, Kingdom of Bahrain
UNDER CONSTRUCTION

2. The Pearl River Tower, Guangzhou, China
UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Compare number 8 to the original post for this thread in this forum.

8.Waugh Thistleton Residential Tower, London
ON THE DRAWING BOARD
JWmHarmon
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:43 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby mx2 » Thu Jun 07, 2007 1:35 pm

I certainly agree with the potential for ADDING wind generated power "plants" on high-rises...it's a fantastic idea in dense ateas that require loads of energy. But to just build a tall frame and slap large fans on it and walk away is not a viable investment. The cost of real estate in dense areas typically won't make economic sense to begin with, even if it were an attempt to be purely a "vertical power plant". And it's a classic NIMBY...who wants to live or work near a power plant? However, if it served a dual purpose, then there is some merit...but what would it's purpose serve? Ooh, I know...how about an occupiable building that has turbines on it? :D

{sacrasm off}

mx2.5
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

gaetanomarano's original post - power plant skyscraper

Postby JWmHarmon » Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:25 pm

gaetanomarano's original post was for an electrical generation power plant harvesting wind power. Such a power plant could be built in locations selected to maximize the collection of wind energy. This location would not be significantly different from building a new coal-fired power plant and the energy would be transmitted over similar power lines.

When you consider the size of the cooling towers in a coal-fired plant, it may not be unreasonable to build a scyscraper for wind energy power generation.

gaetanomarano' suggestion could possibly be modified so that the generators, instead of being on the outside, might be located on the inside of the building. Such a building's interior might be funnel shaped (Venturi) on the inside to accelerate the updraft to drive vertical or horizontal turbines.

The outside of the building could contain cantilevered decks for food crop gardens. This idea would combine gaetanomarano's idea with some of the ideas from two or more of the eco-skyscrapers posted previously.

gaetanomarano - If you have time why don't you draw an interior and an exteior view of this idea. I'm playing lumberjack this week, cutting some heavy timbers out of a tree that was struck by lighning. I don't have the time.


Speaking of lightning, why can't we just capture electons out of the air and store them in skyscraper sized Leydon jar buildings using a 21st century update of Ben Franklin's kite and key concept. How much energy could be stored in a series of Leydon jars or batteries filling up the inside of the skyscraper or a coal-fired plant's coolingtower, or a containment dome of a nuclear power plant? Could the building structure itself itself be built of modified battery cases?
JWmHarmon
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:43 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby thomasdbiggs » Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:34 pm

Hey, that's a great idea. It's intriguing how one would look. The design possibilities are endless. Heres one: propeller blades are mounted over the vents to mechanical spaces at such a distance that air would channel through the propellers spinning them, as the heated air rises through a chimney type exhaust vent above. Also, if the mechanical intake air is not stronger than the wind, the propellers could pivot to match the direction of the strongest wind.

Food for thought.
User avatar
thomasdbiggs
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: Oakland, CA

Postby mx2 » Fri Jun 08, 2007 3:24 pm

gaetanomarano's original post was for an electrical generation power plant harvesting wind power. Such a power plant could be built in locations selected to maximize the collection of wind energy. This location would not be significantly different from building a new coal-fired power plant and the energy would be transmitted over similar power lines.

When you consider the size of the cooling towers in a coal-fired plant, it may not be unreasonable to build a scyscraper for wind energy power generation.


It's not unreasonable at all, that was never a question. However, designing un-occupiable buildings for generating power is not something that I find to be unusual since it is simply an alternative to existing power plants typically found at the outskirts of town. But their low-key profile is best by not highjacking the landscape of the neighborhood...

..basically I don't see the necessity to build vertically if they can build further out from the city cores and remain horizontally challenged. However, to incorporate power generating equipment onto occupiable buildings seems to be a marriage that makes sense...since the buildings already are vertical.

mx2.5
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Postby alexneverhurts » Sun Jun 10, 2007 12:09 am

p.s.:

Somebody just put a huge fan on top of a tall building so that the building can be called "green"? How about asking some genius in MIT to invent certain adjustable semi-transparent solar panel that covers the whole building to block burning sunlight and generate power for AC?

Just kidding.
User avatar
alexneverhurts
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:52 am

Postby psikeyhackr » Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:37 pm

The obvious problem is tha those rotors couldn't change direction and ratate into the wind for maimum efficiency.

Who would pay for the construction of a building that ugly?

psik
User avatar
psikeyhackr
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:14 pm

Postby gaetanomarano » Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:17 pm

mx2 wrote:So it's just a BIG windmill?

no, it's a GREATLY IMPROVED windmill !!!
to-day, the world needs HUGE amounts of energy and that needs may DOUBLE+ in the next 20 years due to the very fast economic growt of China, India and other emerging countries ... and, when that will happen, we will face a giant CUT to half (or less) of the oil/methane reserves with prices that may rise to three, five, ten times the current value
both oil and methane will cost us an every day higher price but are two "energy-dense" fuels (big amounts of energy in small tanks) while all renevable energies have lower costs and zero pollution/CO2 emissions but need (devastate) hundreds sq miles of lands (and their landscape, nature, silence, fauna, etc.)
my "Skyscraper-like Wind Power Plants" are th FIRST (and ONLY, so far) attempt to have an "energy-dense" renevable source putting the rotors stacked (rather than on large horizontal surfaces) REDUCING up to 95% the devastation of lands (and their costs)
only the owners of windy lands to sell may love to-day's horizontal placed wind turbines :)

...it's better to build miles and miles of windmills on large open farms far awya form city cores...

both W.E.S. and standard windmills are VERY UGLY, devastanting for the nature and noisy for the peoples that lives near them, the only difference is that my W.E.S. should CUT up to 95% these problems

.
User avatar
gaetanomarano
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:55 pm

Postby gaetanomarano » Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:38 pm

lekizz wrote:...personally I would prefer one or two large graceful wind turbines than dozens of tiny ones...

unfortunately, "one or two large graceful wind turbines" gives small amounts of energy, so, one+ million of them (not just "one-two") would be necessary to cover the world's energy needs

...one large turbine will be far more efficient than dozens of tiny ones...

no, the biggest wind turbine available to-day (the Enercom E112) gives 6 MW with a rotor diameter of 112 meters, while each (40 meters) rotor of my W.E.S. gives 0.5 MW, so, the 250 rotors of the W.E.S. could give up to 125 MW !!!

...incorporating wind turbines into high rise buildings...

not possible (or not easy nor cheap) for the existing buildings, while, the new buildings with rotors built-in will be just a dozen in the next 5-10 years and their energy will be (about) 10-15% of the buildings' needs, so, that buildings will need a further 85% from other/external sources!

.
Last edited by gaetanomarano on Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
gaetanomarano
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:55 pm

Postby mx2 » Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:41 pm

If you're a bird, I would appreciate the thought, but from the perspective of a typical pedestrian, I'd rather not see towers of fans in my city core...it's another NIMBY. This is not to say that your idea has no merit...your idea has merit. It's just not economically feasible in the way you added it up. Most real estate owners would look for the greatest price to sell...power plants are looking for the cheapest possible means...and since they have to build power grids anyway, they can locate their power planst ANYWHERE on that grid. So they look for the cheapest scrap of land...not the place where vertical structures are necessary. And it would be odd to hike through a desert and come upon a 50 story windmill in the middle of nowhere...

mx2.5
mx2
millennium club
 
Posts: 1985
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Miami, Florida

Re: Wind power generation on skyscrapers - drawing examples

Postby gaetanomarano » Sun Jun 10, 2007 8:33 pm

JWmHarmon wrote:...offers 10 skyscrapers using ecologically friendly designs including wind power generation...

the "skyscrapers with rotors" are beautiful and curious but (absolutely) NOT comparable with my W.E.S. and (also) NOT a good idea nor a solutions for the future energy needs, because...

1. the rotors CAN'T be added (or are not easy nor cheap to add) to the existing buildings, while, the new "buildings with rotors" will be just a dozen in the next 5-10 years giving us a 0.0000000"something"% of the world's energy needs :)

2. the energy produced with two-three rotors will be (about) 10-15% of the buildings' needs, so, that buildings will need a further 85% from other/external sources!

3. the skyscrapers already existing (or built in future) around these "buildings with rotors" could reduce to HALF (or less) this (already small) amount of energy produced doubling its (already high) price!

4. in some designs, the dimension/price of the infrastructures that support the rotors are two/three+ times bigger than a simple windmill multiplying the price of the energy produced

5. the peoples that lives near the existing wind turbines become crazy due to the obsessive noise produced by rotors 24h/day 365d/year and the same will happen with the peoples that will live and work in the apartments and offices of these "buildings with rotors" so (I believe) that rotors will be STOPPED within a few days...

6. the "buildings with rotors" inside the cities are a commercial and economical SUICIDE for the companies that build them since the big structures used for the rotors will cost like those used for the apartments and offices but will give ZERO PROFITS mainly because the prices of the areas inside the cities are 1000+ times higher than those of the desert or poorly inhabitated areas, so, the price of the apartments and offices will be over 50% higher than a rotorless building and the price of the energy produced up to 1000 TIMES higher than those produced in desert lands!!!

then, the "building with rotors" can't be compared with the W.E.S. and are (also) a BAD AND CRAZY IDEA

.
User avatar
gaetanomarano
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:55 pm

Postby gaetanomarano » Sun Jun 10, 2007 8:40 pm

mx2 wrote:The cost of real estate in dense areas typically won't make economic sense to begin with...

I agree

...who wants to live or work near a power plant?

yes, WHO wants to live 24h/365d within the rotors' vibrations and noise?

.
User avatar
gaetanomarano
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:55 pm

Postby alexneverhurts » Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:35 am

Mercy.
This gentleman just proposed some new idea of clean power plant, not to install them onto your apartments. Besides, vertical multi-fan grids do have the advantage to catch more wind power and low design requirement for each fan (compared to those huge and technically challenging ones), but meanwhile, it may suffer from its structural stability (chance of survival in strong winds) and more important: the difficulty of maintenance. Noise won't be a problem here since it is still unproven if the total noise coming from multiple small fans is bigger or smaller than a single huge fan with equal power generation rate. Moreover, this power plants are supposed to be set up in open fields with no buildings where the wind is strong, and no one will care about its noise since there's no one there.
My opinion is: distributed micro system seems to become the trend of future, but the pros and cons of your innovative design are still in balance and I can't see a strong reason to replace the existing ones.
User avatar
alexneverhurts
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:52 am

Postby atmaweapon » Tue Jun 12, 2007 3:05 pm

So much heated discussion… and yet the original proposed idea is simply not going to work because it is non-sense aerodynamically. With out getting into long and arduous details, wind generators are not propellers in reverse, they are large not to make a statement, but because the forces necessary to mobilize the electromagnetic force (emf) are very large. A long catchment area increases the wind pressure mobilizing the generator as well as increasing its effectiveness by means of a larger moment arm. Design of rotor blades is balancing act. If a set of rotor blades are too “stiff” the wind will just flow around it and if the pitch is to low the same thing will happen.

Also there is the problem of clustering generators which is generally a bad a idea since neighboring mills rob energy from each other in the form of increasing turbulence of to the adjacent mills. In wind farms, the layout of assemblies is chosen to optimize between wind mill density and possible cannibalization

… And the list could keep going. Aerodynamics is a very complicated science, very sensitive to many variables.

In short, if such building was built, aerodynamically it would be a large chain link fence.
atmaweapon
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:05 am
Location: Urbana-Champaign Illinois

Postby alexneverhurts » Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:48 pm

atmaweapon wrote:With out getting into long and arduous details, wind generators are not propellers in reverse, they are large not to make a statement, but because the forces necessary to mobilize the electromagnetic force (emf) are very large.

Is it possible to miniaturize the scale of existing large wind generators into smaller scale and keep everything (emf, etc.) in proportion with the size? If this seems feasible, then the small generator will work the same to the large one.
Wind turbulence coming from nearby units is a serious problem that I never thought about before, but I don't think there's no solution to this problem. With the proposed distributed design, localized changes can be made to best compensate the effect, and with sensors built onto the grids, hundreds of fans can be automatically controlled in real time, according to the sensed wind pressures (or speeds) on each grid. With all these flexibilities, a computer model can be used to shift each gird between generator and motor, in order to control the wind speed passing through the grids. Then an overall wind pressure pattern can be formed artificially in this way, to minimize turbulence and maximize efficiency.
You said the fan can't be too rigid or too loose. It's true, and in my proposal, I let computer to decide and change it in real time (through the combination of hundreds of grids).
I'm an electrical engineer. I don't know a lot about aerodynamics, but I do know the power of automatic control and distributed micro system.
Do you think this is possible?
User avatar
alexneverhurts
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:52 am

PreviousNext

Return to New Structure Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

cron

User Control Panel

Login

Who is online

In this forum zone there are 2 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 508 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:21 am

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest
DesignCommunity   ·   ArchitectureWeek   ·   Great Buildings   ·   Archiplanet   ·   Books   ·   Blogs   ·   Search
Special thanks to our sustaining subscribers Building Design UK, Building Design News UK, and Building Design Tenders UK.