The following are comments to Another Ducted Device Dead: SheerWind-Invelox Bankrupt. They were so insightful I decided to repost them here where they are more easily archived.
Note that every one of these commentators has worked with renewable energy or renewable energy policy for years. Jim Tangler is a retired NREL aerodynamicist. Andrea Kraj has a PhD in mechanical engineering. Matt Tritt has worked with wind energy for nearly four decades. In short, these people know their stuff.
Jack Kerfoot asks the question that might be raised by those who don’t see the obvious flaw in this design. Matt Tritt explains the answer succinctly.
Bob Tregilus Yup, this: “and ignorance is epidemic among American politicians today,” which is why we need more scientists and engineers to run for public offices.
And another word you might use in lieu of “device” might be “gimcrack”. 🙂 If you need an adjective modifier, then “whimsical” gimcrack might work. It would certainly apply in the case of SheerWind. And whoa, that one they installed at the Army National Guard-Michigan looks like some kind of Peter Pan ride at Disneyland.
Gary Zavitz It almost looks like one end of Elmer Fudd’s rifle.
Christopher Kuntz That is funny….I think it’s mongoose season.
Roy Amberg Unbelievable how the same silly thing showed up over and over again
James Tangler Buying some dead horses would be a better investment. It is documented in 30 year old wind reports that this concept is not cost effective relative to horizontal -axis wind turbines.
Andrea Kraj Such a waste of t & $ that could be used elsewhere…
Matt Tritt Could make a pair of killer speakers.
Jack Kerfoot What was the weakness or flaw in the technology?
Matt Tritt Mainly that a moving fluid (in this case air) will always take the path of least resistance to an obstruction. In this case a venturi). Wind goes around and/or slows down when confronted with this type of object. In other words, no workee.
