Windspire vertical turbine on sale now, aiming to capture the consumer wind power market

We've covered plenty of wind turbines over the years, but most tend to be awfully conceptual or rather unsuited to consumer applications. Being eco-geeks at heart we're happy to report on a new one that is both consumer-friendly and in production now. Mariah Power's Windspire is a 9 meter tall vertical turbine intended for residential or commercial installation, capable of providing about a quarter of the power an "average" household needs (2000 kWh annually). It's "bird-friendly" thanks to a relatively slow maximum blade speed (2.5 times that of the wind) and even includes WiFi so you can watch your carbon footprint shrink wirelessly. The company is accepting orders now, and while prices aren't listed on the website (you'll need to request a quote), we hear you can get yourself into a 2009 model with a 5 year unlimited rotation warranty for around $5,000 -- plus customization if you want one in something other than "Soft Silver." We'll take ours in magenta, thanks.

[Via Digg]

[Larry @ Dec 1st 2008 7:40AM]

So does that mean that 4 of them would supply 100% of the average household power use? Seems fairly reasonable to me in order to get off the grid!

[MadMike @ Dec 1st 2008 8:44AM]

Unfortunately the wind doesn't blow 100% of the time and even then when it is moving, it's not optimal 100% of that time either. You would need at least 5 or 6 of them and some sort of battery setup. However, two of these and a decent solar setup could lower your power bills to almost nothing.

However, it is a step in the right direction. Low cost consumer power options.

[j_g_puff @ Dec 1st 2008 8:45AM]

You'd only be off the grid until the wind stopped...

[j_g_puff @ Dec 1st 2008 8:50AM]

Mike, you've hit the nail on the head.

[GeekPI @ Dec 1st 2008 12:11PM]

MadMike - that's why many utilities are required to support grid intertie. The excess electricity would be 'stored' in the grid and would ultimately zero out your consumption over the year. However, you'd likely still be on the hook for all those fees utilities love to charge.

[dasDoodle @ Dec 1st 2008 12:59PM]

Well, when the wind doesn't blow, invite the neighborhood children over and feed them some Hi-C and play ring-around-the-rosy to Hannah Montana...they'll get the thing spinning...just beware of overkill and...whatever you do...don't feed them after midnight.

[BigD145 @ Dec 1st 2008 1:58PM]

Grid tie is supported because it's free energy for the utilities. You don't get cash back if you're winding your meter back.

[Solar BOb @ Dec 1st 2008 2:39PM]

Whether or not you get cash back if you 'wind back your meter' apparently depends on where you live. Washington State has a great program. My power company is required to pay me for power I send back to the grid from my solar panels. In addition, every year, the power company also pays me for the total power I generated from my solar panels, regardless of whether I used it or it went to the grid - it's like double-dipping.

[LarryLarryLarry @ Dec 2nd 2008 4:51AM]

This is not a great idea for getting off the grid. You need six of these at $5000 each - that's $30,000. If you pay $150 a month for electricity (super high bill for conservative estimate), you will reach break-even after... 200 months. That's almost 17 years. Who knows what technology will be available in 17 years? Something a lot better than this.

It's a ridiculous waste of $30,000. If you earn 10% annually on $30,000, it will be over $164,000 after 17 years. You can buy a lot of electricity with that money.

Even if you are hell-bent on "saving the Earth", you can do a lot better with your $30,000 than this.

[Saad Rabia @ Dec 1st 2008 7:40AM]

I would totally buy one of these if I owned my own house. Love the idea and the outcome.

[Ogo @ Dec 1st 2008 2:49PM]

With the thought of efficiency, wouldn't we save a lot of power in North America if we switched from 120V -> 220V?

[Hbishop @ Dec 1st 2008 7:41AM]

Another fad soon to bite the dust when reality sets in...

Go nuclear or go dark.

[Samboini @ Dec 1st 2008 7:54AM]

Agreed. As much as I favour renewable energy, its supply will not sustain our needs going forward.

[jared @ Dec 1st 2008 7:59AM]

Yeah, wind is such a total fad. I can't wait for it to just go away forever.

[Flashpoint @ Dec 1st 2008 8:18AM]

I've always been a proponent of nuclear energy. We just need to find a better way to store - or recycle the wastes.

America needs to invest in a digital power grid (2 trillion dollars) so we can make our energy use/transfer more efficient. If we maade our national grid 5% more efficient it would be the equivalent of taking 53 million cars off the road.

I know nobody wants to hear numbers like $2T but I'd rather spend our bailout money improving the countries infrastructure than proping up failed corporations.

[Ryback @ Dec 1st 2008 9:03AM]

@Hbishop: Nuclear is the dying fad. There is only enough uranium to quench the world's thirst for power for the next ten years and that's by todays consumption. The energy need will only accelerate as todays emerging economies will pick up pace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_PAT

I recommend Jeffrey D. Sachs' "Common Wealth". http://www.amazon.com/Common-Wealth-Economics-Crowded-Planet/dp/1594201277/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1228139286&sr=8-1

[GQ @ Dec 1st 2008 11:18AM]

Here is the next nuclear fad: http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/index.html

:-)

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Dec 1st 2008 2:16PM]

ryback:
There's fuel for well over a hundred years if we use breeder reactors to create more fuel. There are no commercial breeders operating in the US, but we have government ones, and France has breeders too.

[SiXiam @ Dec 1st 2008 7:45AM]

$5000 of electricity would last me years...
$20,000 of electricity would last me decades...

[ack154 @ Dec 1st 2008 7:55AM]

Ya, I think this is going to vary by household... but this is a good point. The big up front cost of $5000+ could easily be used to pay these expensive electricity bills in the first place.

I think each family would have to figure out when it would pay for itself over time... if it ever would.

One good reason that I almost like apartment life... my electricity bill is typically no more than $50/mo. I don't know how many kWhrs that is though.

[jared @ Dec 1st 2008 8:01AM]

My electricity bill is around 350 dollars a month. Even 25% of that would pay for itself in around 5 years...totally worth it.

[A non eMous @ Dec 1st 2008 9:20AM]

I once saw an episode of 'This Old House' where they were discussing solar/wind energy and one benefit was when more energy was being produced than consumed the excess was added back to the grid. The electric company then paid for the power being added to the grid.

This might be another thing to consider when figuring cost vs benefit.

[Exolon @ Dec 1st 2008 11:35AM]

That is a big up-front price. Currently, in our average-size 3 bedroom house, three of us run up a total of about €30 a month in electricity and maybe €20 on gas (for heating/shower... if I could turn it off and replace it with an electric shower I would - most of the bill comes from a standing charge since we're quite frugal with it).
So that's six and a half years of power at our current usage rate before we (might) break even.

This is moot anyway, since we don't live anywhere where we could possibly install such a large device... But it's important to consider the practical cost/savings ratio and time to break even. Most people don't have infinite money, so wouldn't consider installing something like this (at a financial loss) just to help the environment and break away from fossil fuels, no matter how noble an idea it may be.

These things need to get cheaper and more powerful, but it's good to see even a little progress.

[Cuchanu @ Dec 1st 2008 2:55PM]

It may not be for those who only want to save money, but for those who want to survive the zombie apocalypse it's perfect.

[GingerFox @ Dec 1st 2008 7:47AM]

Go nuclear or go dark.- love itXD

[absinthe party @ Dec 1st 2008 7:48AM]

A certain room here in our R&D lab uses $460,000.00 a year in electricity, and several of us have been tasked to look into cost-saving plans.

Thanks, Engadget, for helping me score a potential promotion this year!

[Samboini @ Dec 1st 2008 7:56AM]

WTF? Are you trying to create Frankenstein or something? $460k is a fair amount of energy.

[absinthe party @ Dec 1st 2008 8:03AM]

Haha. Serious innovation requires serious consumption.

[seanchk @ Dec 1st 2008 8:26AM]

Thats a crazy amount of electricity for one lab !!

You guys need to learn to turn off the lights when you go home and stop letting people recharging their ipods in the lab ;-)

[absinthe party @ Dec 1st 2008 8:35AM]

@ seanchk

Actually, that's only a single lifetest room. That doesn't include the rest of the power devouring lab.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but does anyone here have any experience or advice on large scale wind power production?

[drewmacphee @ Dec 1st 2008 9:34AM]

I know a guy who works for a company here in Montreal that does exactly what you need.
They look at how you use electricity and find was to save you money over a period of your choice.
They take a cut of whatever you save and do all the leg work.
Looking into tax breaks in your area and such.

I know they do work in New York State. But in sure there must be other companies like them.

[ZIG @ Dec 1st 2008 9:32AM]

solar energy cells can save you a load of cash when it comes to electricity, i have one mounted the roof of my house and i never have to turn the electric heater for around 4-6 months of the year.. but i guess it varies from region to region depending on the weather in your area... and they are relatively cheap as well, mine cost me around $500 and it works like magic, so imagine what a whole bunch of them would do for you...

[absinthe party @ Dec 1st 2008 9:57AM]

@ drewmacphee

Yeah, we looked into a few consulting services, but I think that they were proposing plans that weren't in our best interests. Our major setback is that we're forced into a 3-year ROI or no deal.

@ ZIG

Unfortunately, solar is much too cost-inefficient for large business.

[Paul @ Dec 1st 2008 9:57AM]

Some MechE grad students did a project at my school looking for viable alternative energy sources (including both wind and solar power) to power a large international airports lights. They found that there was no real cost benefit of going alternative, despite the large power consumption of these runway lights.

I hope that helps.

[collegekid13 @ Dec 1st 2008 7:49AM]

fuck nuclear waste. i want one of these. or twelve

[Homeboy @ Dec 1st 2008 7:57AM]

I bet that one of them on their own wouldn't provide enough juicy to power a Crysis killing desktop with Core i7 Extreme, 12GB RAM, SLI, 24 display and whatnot. Like the one below:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/03/intel-core-i7-equipped-falcon-northwest-mach-v-gaming-desktop-ha/

[Tom Moitie @ Dec 1st 2008 7:57AM]

@absinthe party
If they say it can produce 2000KW a year, each turbine would take about 15 years to pay itself off, by which time it will probably be broken.

[absinthe party @ Dec 1st 2008 8:07AM]

Yeah, you bring up an interesting point. The 5 year limited warranty kind of throws me off, but according to the Mariah Power website, there is a 3kW Windspire in development, which may help our case. It's an interesting concept to look into, at least, especially with the potential tax credits.

[Fredster @ Dec 1st 2008 12:25PM]

@Absinthe Party

You might want to look at the Energy Ball too at www.homeenergy.se. Unfortunately it is in Swedish, thouhgt they had somewhere in English though. There was a post once here on Engadget, so you might want to do a search....

[Marcela @ Dec 1st 2008 7:58AM]

I would love to buy...but where I live its not 'windy' enough to one of this make any eco-power. But some day...when a have a house in the beach...or something.

[Chris @ Dec 1st 2008 8:06AM]

Is magenta going to be a meme forever since the 'T-Mobile Incident' ?

[grillface @ Dec 1st 2008 8:06AM]

It's not just the cost savings we should consider -- think of the environmental benefit too!

And, in case of the collapse of civilisation, you'd still be able to have power whilst everyone else was left in the dark 8).

[Saltboy @ Dec 1st 2008 8:09AM]

I would love to have one of these. I have even looked into getting solar panels on the roof. Sadly, it would take me 20+ years to recover my costs for the panels and 14 years on this turbine.

[Bill @ Dec 1st 2008 8:18AM]

So leave all your lights on, and install new ones. This should speed your payback time substantially.

[GeekPI @ Dec 1st 2008 12:18PM]

Don't forget the equipment is likely sales tax free, and you'd be eligible for a 30% federal tax rebate (no cap) on the solar equipment and install, along with a 30%, $2000 cap on the wind equipment. Many utilities and states also offer other incentives. Washington State offers a $0.56 per kWh incentive, up to $2,000 annually, until 2014.

Factoring in all that, plus reduced bills, typically puts payback in the realm of 5-7 years. Most solar panels have warranties that last 25-30 years.

[Salsa Shark @ Dec 1st 2008 8:17AM]

$5,000 to save $220/year in electric bills?

That's a 22-year return on investment. I'm all for the green thing, but this just isn't practical in any sense of the word.

[Mike_NYC @ Dec 1st 2008 9:03AM]

I think it all depends on where you live. Here in NYC, I pay about 32 cents per KWH for both generation and delivery. Delivery alone from Con Edison, NYC's local power company, is about 8-9cents per KWH in my last few bills. For someone here, it would be a much more cost effective option. Of course I could not put one of those on top of my apartment building, but, many of my friends and family who live in the area, but outside the city limits, could. They pay almost as much for their electricity as I do, and the NY metropolitan area has good wind potential.

So, my point is that I think wind makes "cents" where it makes sense. That case being here where electricity is not cheap. For the record, I pay roughly $80 - 130 a month, depending on the season, for my electricity.

[Salsa Shark @ Dec 1st 2008 9:11AM]

Fair enough. I used $.11, which was the average as of April 2008.

Even so--32 cents is almost an eight-year return, assuming no equipment degradation. While that's better, I'd also question if NYC would allow a three-story wind turbine to be installed in your yard, assuming you're fortunate enough to even have a yard. For an area as dense as NYC, I'd think nuclear power would be the best option.

It's a step in the right direction but still very much a niche technology, like solar power. It has reach some level of practicality (cost, size, efficiency) before it'll be adopted by the masses.

[skant @ Dec 1st 2008 10:31AM]

It would actually be closer to 23 years and in fact you also haven't taken into account the time value of money.

[Salsa Shark @ Dec 1st 2008 10:53AM]

That would be a rather pointless exercise with all the unknowns involved. Maybe alternative energy takes off and we end up paying a nickel...or it goes the way of the oil companies and we're paying a buck. Will the dollar be worth more or less?

Who knows? I can't take into account variables that have no reasonable predictable values.