Why Not Add Wind Turbines to the Queensboro Bridge in NY?
by Petz Scholtus, Barcelona, Spain on 04.24.08
Some people find wind turbines ugly, others say they kill birds (read more about that myth here and here), but New York based artist Andrea Polli likes them so much, she wants to see some on top of Queensboro Bridge. She believes that integrating clean, renewable wind power can enhance the beauty of a city and suggests combining the landmark architecture of one of New York’s bridges, with wind power.
Paul Hawken, author of Natural Capitalism, is definitely on her side, describing the project like this:
The Queensboro Bridge is a beautiful artifact of the industrial age and this project represents the transition that can and must be made from the industrial age, dependent on fossil fuels, to an industrial era that lives off of solar income...wind is solar energy too, and all sustainability is about getting the income to expense ratio on solar income to something that can be sustained by living systems.
This seems a simple enough idea, that, if put in practice, could set a great example for really integrating wind power into our cities.
As seen at Eyebeam in NYC, alongside Drinkpee. ::Queensbridge Wind Power Project
It's a intriguing idea, and I like the concept. But I believe she will fail to gain support because she is using the wrong type of wind turbine.
I do not feel it complements the architecture. I believe a Darrius (egg beater) wind turbine would be much more aesthetic and easier to implement since it will be better balanced weight wise.
Something like this: http://www.reuk.co.uk/OtherImages/darrieus-rotor.jpg
I would love to see a large bridge built with these. What would be more interesting is if someone could design a color pattern that would emphasize different colors at different speeds. Then it would look as if it was changing color. Such a bridge would surely become a world recognize landmark. And the artist/engineer world reknown.
This would be good. I HATE wind because people are clearing vast amounts of land to build the stuff.
And the way they work, even the ones require, IIRC, a quarter acre per turbine.
Solar is good because solar is put on top of homes and most non-skyscraper buildings and nothing new really needs to be built.
Seeing wind turbines out in the middle of Ocean breaks my heart. Seeing them on bridges though? That would be neat!
Why not put windmills on all power lines poles? It would be easy to collect and distribute the power...
Seeing windmills out in the middle of the ocean would be great. Makes all the sense in the world.
Jason the Saj,
how does this "egg beater" wind turbine work?
I think putting windmills ontop of the bridges is a good idea. Any updates about the water turbines in the east river?
wind turbines why use them when we can use solar panels and solar is getting cheeper every day then we dont need to worry about killing any birds right
wind power is nice yes and renewable but solar panels dont take up any extra room all you have to do is put them on top of some thing like a house, building, Bridge, or why not even our vehicles.
Birds are only killed in significant numbers in old fashioned, pre 1990s high-speed windmills. Modern, large diameter windmills kill no more birds than if it were a non-moving structure of the same size.
Skyscrapers in a single city kill more birds than all windmills worldwide put together.
Pollution from non-renewable energy kills orders-of-magnitude more birds than windmills.
to my knowledge the last eggbeater windmill company went belly-up in the 90's. they simply don't perform well in varying wind conditions & can't compete with the large propeller designs.
although I like this idea & think it should happen, I don't think that adding 6-8 turbines is going to produce enough energy to get rid of even 1 of the smoke stacks shown in the video. that level of power production would require a major wind farm with hundreds of turbines. maybe if these were installed on every bridge then it would make an impact but this installation is little more than "eye candy" to give people the delusion that they're saving the world.
I like the idea, its a good way to get wind into the city with the huge transmission losses.
That said, they can't be build so close together (Paired on the suspension towers) even if they switch to darrius type,which are far under developed compared to HAWTs (horizontal axis wind turbine) which could make better use on the wind at that height.
To all you folks saying you don't like wind turbines: seriously? you don't see the flaw in a monosourced energy grid? its why gas is so expensive now. energy needs to come from as many sources as possible for a sustainable and secure future, not just the ones you think are nice.
The wind power is good idea, but i don't like turbine on bridge...
why is this only thought of in NYC why not bring it to other areas. In Delaware they are looking to put wind mills 5 miles or so off the shore for wind power. Why not use this same idea down here in DE?
Good idea in theory.
However:
Existing bridges have not been engineered to accept the weight load of additional structure, nor have they been engineered to accept the additional stresses from winds pushing against the windmill;
A rotary blade windmill design would have to rise far above other structure of the bridge in order to allow the blades to pivot to intercept changing winds and avoid colliding with bridge structure;
A vertical axis windmill could be used, but they are far less advanced and tend to be much lower capacities.
All in all it may be cheaper, quicker and less headache to put up a new tower where the winds are.
I always thought wind turbines look beautiful. You'd think they'd be on top of any bridge, powerline, skyscrapper, or non flat surface in urban areas.
Once you'd recouped the cost of building it's free and non polluting. I don't know how you beat that.
I'm not against installing wind turbines where they can function economically and don't spoil scenic views. I'm also pro solar and will be first in line for an electric car. IMHO we have got to get ourselves off foreign oil as it is ruinous.
But there are a couple of things that strike me as weird about this video. First of all, the stacks she is pointing out are all gas-fired plants and do not emit "smoke". What she is seeing is steam from combustion of natural gas. As a native New Yorker I know people there are smart enough not to get up in arms about water vapor.
Second, the big windmills need 1000 ft spacing to function correctly, or else the upwind mill "robs" the wind from the downwind mill. So you will never see as many windmills on the Queensboro Bridge as shown in the video.
It is a good idea to generate power at the load center (in a big city) so you don't lose anything in transmission. Maybe several smaller ones would work but you have to have a *very* windy spot for them to be economical. Even then, wind power is notorious for maximizing generation in the Spring and Fall when you don't need extra power, and not being available in the Summer and Winter when the grid needs every megawatt.
My 2 cents. Thanks for reading.
A vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) would be the appropriate style for this application (no vibration to transfer to the bridge and possibly damage its structural integrity). Oregon Wind has a new VAWT design that is in R&D and will be perfect for this sort of application. We are also pairing wind turbines with PV panels to increase reliability of power.