Why anecdotal evidence isn't very useful:
Quote:
I've had a Rutland 913 for about 16 years now and hardly ever get any usable power out of the damned thing. It stays tied off most of the time
|
Perhaps if you untied it you would get some power out of it! But seriously...
All the folks who report happiness with their turbines are well meaning, but their statements mean only that the unit met their expectations and specific requirements. There are such great variations in
wind environments, installations and
electrical demands that these reports, while interesting and sometimes entertaining, will not provide the kind of info that the OP seeks. A truly unbiased study by trained observers would be nice, but ain't likely to happen in this life. And getting a meaningful mean time between failures is not possible with individual reports, is it? Such numbers require pretty large populations of units being reported upon, not unique experiences of individual installations.
The post that listed the physical factors that limit output coupled with anecdotal noise reports from the posters should provide enough data for a reasonable choice.
And for those who extol the virtues of solely
solar, well, there are situations where that fails. EG, northbound up the E coast of Oz, where one likes to have winds aft of the beam and the sun is always to the north of you, the
marine layer adds cloud cover and the
sails pretty much kill the
solar, day after day. The turbine will do its share under those conditions, hampered somewhat by low apparent wind speeds... better than nothing IMO! Of course, a hydrogenerator is better yet, but that's another subject.
Jim