This is a good read. The difficulty of transporting large wind components over land is one reason that onshore wind turbines have lower maximum capacities vs. offshore turbines. The largest onshore turbine is 5.3 megawatts [1] while the largest offshore turbine is 9.5 megawatts [2]. Transporting super-large components by sea is easier -- no tunnels, bridges, or winding roads to worry about.
Very tall turbines tend to improve capacity factor and project economics by tapping steadier winds found further away from the ground. For onshore projects, at least, that benefit is in tension with the more difficult transport and assembly logistics noted in this article.
Solar has the logistics edge in that all of the components for a solar farm are much smaller and weigh less. Even the largest individual solar modules are under 40 kilograms each. Racking systems are also assembled out of smaller pieces. No oversized loads need to be transported to the solar farm site. There are more truckloads of components for a 400 megawatt solar farm vs. a 400 kilowatt farm, but the individual components and trucks need be no larger.
Vestas is heavily marketing their 5.6 MW platform now, and at least sending preliminary sales and design information to clients. We're probably a couple of years out from installing any that big though.
The real surprise is how fast capacity has jumped. We went through a period of rapid size increase, then a decade plus plateau around the 2 MW mark, and now a very rapid rise to 4+ MW onshore.
It's true we get to better winds higher up, but we also see some significant cost advantages related to building fewer turbine foundations, needing to erect fewer individual units and having relatively fewer miles of site road and collection to achieve the same production.
Given the huge promise of terrestrial wind farms, it seems like someone is right now figuring out a way to either a) fabricate them on-site, or b) fly the parts in via drone or dirigible.
I don't know the chemistry behind it, but it's interesting to hear the counter argument that it will actually create more polution to build a solar panel relative to its lifetime. Would love to read more.
Someone on the site asks about helicopters and I wonder the same thing. I know helicopters are hellishly expensive to use, but they are used occasionally - eg for ski lifts.
>The largest wind turbines can weigh up to 700,000 pounds fully assembled and typically require around 10 loads to transport.
so, average speaking the components are on the scale of 35t/each. The current helicopters top at about 20t payload, so could be used only for some smaller parts. That one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_V-12 could have done more jobs here. Or it is a new and shiny market for airships (or some kind of hybrid with airship)
Stupid question but is there a market for lots of smaller wind turbines? What’s the efficiency like vs. one big turbine? Is there something like a solar farm with modular panels, but for wind?
This has a strong propaganda smell - he fails to mention the use of fossil fuels in production of nuclear fuel; he also fails to mention the use of concrete and steel in the construction of nuclear power plants.
I wish you could magically get power out of a lump of radioactive metal that you found lying on the surface of the ground, in the real world you have to build infrastructure to harness it.
[+] [-] philipkglass|6 years ago|reply
Very tall turbines tend to improve capacity factor and project economics by tapping steadier winds found further away from the ground. For onshore projects, at least, that benefit is in tension with the more difficult transport and assembly logistics noted in this article.
Solar has the logistics edge in that all of the components for a solar farm are much smaller and weigh less. Even the largest individual solar modules are under 40 kilograms each. Racking systems are also assembled out of smaller pieces. No oversized loads need to be transported to the solar farm site. There are more truckloads of components for a 400 megawatt solar farm vs. a 400 kilowatt farm, but the individual components and trucks need be no larger.
[1] https://www.genewsroom.com/press-releases/ges-largest-onshor...
[2] https://en.wind-turbine-models.com/turbines/1605-mhi-vestas-...
[+] [-] scblock|6 years ago|reply
The real surprise is how fast capacity has jumped. We went through a period of rapid size increase, then a decade plus plateau around the 2 MW mark, and now a very rapid rise to 4+ MW onshore.
It's true we get to better winds higher up, but we also see some significant cost advantages related to building fewer turbine foundations, needing to erect fewer individual units and having relatively fewer miles of site road and collection to achieve the same production.
[+] [-] pytester|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ChuckMcM|6 years ago|reply
It is an insanely awesomely large machine too. 66,000 volts! Wow, just wow.
[+] [-] jacquesm|6 years ago|reply
Enercon wants a word with you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enercon_E-126
And Vestas has an even larger one.
[+] [-] hyperbovine|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] simplify|6 years ago|reply
I don't know the chemistry behind it, but it's interesting to hear the counter argument that it will actually create more polution to build a solar panel relative to its lifetime. Would love to read more.
[+] [-] directionless|6 years ago|reply
They're a small company that uses a neat system to manufacture the towers onsite, cutting down the shipping for it.
(Disclosure -- they're friends of mine, but I have no direct experience with them)
[+] [-] csours|6 years ago|reply
Helicopter Installs Ski Lift Towers at a Private Ski Club: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83MPTPNXhTs
[+] [-] trhway|6 years ago|reply
so, average speaking the components are on the scale of 35t/each. The current helicopters top at about 20t payload, so could be used only for some smaller parts. That one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_V-12 could have done more jobs here. Or it is a new and shiny market for airships (or some kind of hybrid with airship)
[+] [-] latchkey|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] michaelwilson|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheSpiceIsLife|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dawnerd|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JohnJamesRambo|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] michaelhoney|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jakeogh|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] csours|6 years ago|reply
I wish you could magically get power out of a lump of radioactive metal that you found lying on the surface of the ground, in the real world you have to build infrastructure to harness it.