Next Generation Wind Turbine Breaks $1/Watt Barrier

solveclimate.com

18 points·sah··3 comments

Does anyone know what the "$1/Watt" figure is supposed to mean?

"And it will make wind cheap – $1 per watt, installed – for the first time ever, with the 250,000 kWh machine to be priced at $250,000."

- kWh are a measure of energy, not power. (1 kW sustained over 1 hour) Are they saying the turbine's lifetime is limited generating that much energy?

- The paragraph above implies that the cost is $1/kWh - somewhat more reasonable than $1/Wh. Although that's still more (~3x) than I'm paying for my electricity right now.

Alternative theory: what they mean is the turbine generates up to 250kW under ideal conditions, and costs $250k to set up. That would mean the $1/Watt figure is about setup costs. (depends on the amount of required maintenence whether that's an interesting number)

Your alternative theory is right. What they mean is that the turbine costs $250k retails, setup costs excluded. And these will add 10% easily - foundation, electrical network link etc. And the turbine generates 250kW of peak power under ideal (right wind) conditions. So the $1/W figure is, as you say, a one-time cost. Maintenance should be pretty low however.

This is mostly likely garbage.

There are innumerable companies with prototype systems that claim theirs will be cheaper than all others. There's no evidence that this turbine will be particularly cheap, and there's plenty of evidence (the kW / kWh confusion, the mention of "surface-wind energy") that the author is unfamiliar with renewable energy and likely unable to determine whether a new wind turbine is better or worse than existing turbines.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com