China is building a wind turbine of unthinkable dimensions

Ten years ago, a General Electric turbine with 350-foot blades was considered the ultimate dream. At that time, its dimensions boggled the imagination of any engineer – but there is always room for another dream, isn't there? So, the megalomania continued: in 2021, the MingYang Smart Energy Chinese company built its titan with blades 390 feet long each!
However, this is not the limit. Wind turbines of even more unthinkable dimensions will soon become our new reality in the energy sector. And one of them is almost ready.

#turbine #inventions #tehnology #windturbine

Don’t miss next videos: Press the little bell ((🔔)) to get notifications

[kcman]

Lived in Mianyang for a few years. Just seeing these turbine parts from the side of the freeway on the way from Mianyang to Deyang is impressive! Very underrated manufacturing hub.

[justanotherguy]

Dear US-Americans! Please could you stop bothering the rest of humanity with your completely anachronistic units of measurement? Hardly anybody outside the USA understands what "853 feet" or "120 miles per hour" means.

This video in particular is about Chinese wind turbines. No Chinese engineer ever designed a wind turbine in feet, they use metric, like >95% of all people on this planet. The names of the wind turbines include their dimensions in metric (e.g. at 2:50, the Heizhuang H260-18MW has a rotor diameter of 260m). Converting this to some ancient, complicated units of measurement does not make sense.

[tihzho]

Do Americans really need football fields and stadiums as units of measure to understand dimensions? 😆

[daverose]

The numbers and sizes are difficult to imagine. Having scaled diagrams of turbines next to each other would really help.

[dorothygale]

They're also putting a coal fired power plant on stream every week using high sulfur coal.

[jamesthrbr]

Did anybody notice that there was no mention of capacity factor or capital cost, including storage?

[MikeHudson-pxgc]

Geothermal is the answer. Cheaper, more reliable, and runs 24/365 no matter the weather conditions.

[RoySATX]

Living in San Antonio, TX most of my life I use the height of the Tower of the Americas as a reference, it stands at 622' (to the top of the roof, I don't count the tower which rises to 750'). So when I think of a 450' blade, that's two-thirds the height of the tower and damn impressive. I wouldn't want to be too close to it in operation, to be sure.

[manuell]

Imagine someone gets duct-taped on the end of a blade as punishment.

[hornplayer]

So it turned out not to be "unthinkable" after all.

[RonOside]

It cost more to build a wind turbine than it will ever save.

[feiipink]

Power of wind turbines are defined by: P=0.5pV³πR², so yes if you double the radius of the blade you got 4 times more power. Also at higher altitudes you have more wind.

[CTAC]

To compare the production of kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year between a nuclear reactor and the biggest wind turbine, we need to consider their respective capacities and average annual energy output. Let's assume a hypothetical scenario for this comparison:

Nuclear Reactor:
Suppose the nuclear reactor has a capacity of 1, 000 megawatts (MW) and operates at a capacity factor of 90%. The capacity factor represents the actual output relative to the maximum potential output over a given period.
Calculation:
Annual energy output = Capacity (MW) x Capacity factor x Hours in a year
Annual energy output = 1, 000 MW x 0.90 x 8, 760 hours (assuming 24 hours per day, 365 days per year)
Annual energy output = 7, 884, 000 MWh (7.884 million kWh)

Biggest Wind Turbine:
Let's assume the biggest wind turbine has a capacity of 10 MW and operates at an average capacity factor of 40%. Wind turbines have lower capacity factors compared to nuclear reactors due to variable wind conditions.
Calculation:
Annual energy output = Capacity (MW) x Capacity factor x Hours in a year
Annual energy output = 10 MW x 0.40 x 8, 760 hours
Annual energy output = 35, 040 MWh (35, 040, 000 kWh)

Now, to determine how many wind turbines would be needed to produce the same amount of energy as one nuclear reactor:

Number of wind turbines needed = Annual energy output of nuclear reactor / Annual energy output of a single wind turbine
Number of wind turbines needed = 7, 884, 000 MWh / 35, 040 MWh
Number of wind turbines needed ≈ 225 wind turbines

Please note that these calculations are based on hypothetical assumptions and the actual performance of nuclear reactors and wind turbines may vary. Additionally, the size and capacity of wind turbines can vary, so the number of turbines required for equivalent energy production can differ accordingly.
😪

[guycore]

Wind turbine escalation is like Itchy and Scratchy wielding larger pistols until they're the size of Earth. Once we make wind turbines as wide as a planet, we can harness the solar wind. Checkmate, physics.

[remon]

In Europe / Netherlands we start to limit the dimensions of wind mills to 1000 feet, 305meter. Larger than that simply cannot be transpired over roads or otherwise.

[ts_texas_usa]

Thanks a whole lot, really, for expressing area in terms of "NFL football fields". I've never been in one or seen one, and I don't have even the vaguest clue about the size of such a sports field. ;)

[RonTodd-gbeo]

No matter how big still won't generate any power when the wind ain't blowing.

[clown]

The bigger, the higher its stand, the harder it falls.

[micpic]

I like the wind turbines because they make the landscape look so pretty.

[billhanna]

Have they worked out what they are going to do with the 8 million tons of F/G blades when there use by date arrives, I see Germany are dumping them in landfills ... Green energy ???