Gar,
Yes I was offering Makani power as an alternative to the flying
helicopter tethered at 33,000 feet. That's a long string, and frankly it seems
farcical.
Gene
On Jun 3, 2010, at 7:11 PM, Gar Lipow wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Eugene Coyle <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Gar,
>> What seems like a more practical variation of this technology is
>> described in The New Yorker of May 17, 2010.
>
>
> I searched the New Yorker to see what was described in that issue. OK
> you are talking about Makani power, one type of kite or flying wing.
> The best description I know of this offhand is from Saul Griffith's
> TED talk
> http://locavolt.com/energy/power-generation/wind/kite-generators/74/makani-power-high-altitude-power-kites,'
>
> Several problems with this
>
> 1) He only expects to get up to 2,000 feet. Less power. So unless his
> costs are substantially less than with the "tethered helicopters" you
> will end up with higher costs per kWh.
>
> 2) less mature tech. Still developing the steering mechanism. Being
> unpowered, the kite/flying wing is tricky to steer. With tethered
> helicopters we know how to steer the damn thing. (Yes, even staying
> in place takes some steering. And the "kite" idea is based on not
> really staying in placing but constantly circleing or swooping.
>
> On the other hand, maybe you meant the Pedicab from the same issue.
> Which I have to admit is a far more mature technology than either kind
> of flying energy generator.
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
