The Sky Serpent: Twenty-Five Turbines in One
Wed, May 14, 2008
Environmental Graffiti Will be Changing Dramatically Soon. Get a Sneak Preview By Signing Up Here.
Image via popular science
Attempting to continue our wind power theme, we were doing some digging and what we found was something truly spectacular. A California man has constructed a design that features twenty-five small turbines in lieu of the massive blades on a modern wind power plan. One day this may approach the production capacity of the behemoths.
Doug Selsam’s Sky Serpent is the right invention at the right time: traditional turbines are perpetually on back order, and he has 3kw of generation capacity that’s far more affordable and requires fewer materials to build.Selsam, who attended college at UC-Irvine but didn’t graduate, has very little formal training in the ways of physics or wind power, which is probably what left him prepared to break the mold. “This is a 1,000 year-old design” he says of the single-bladed turbine, “I knew if I could get more rotors, I could get more power.”
While on the surface that is in fact true, it flies against the dogma of the engineers and physicists that dominate the wind power community. The complicated physics of ensuring each rotor doesn’t simply encounter the prop wash of the ones in front of it, may have been enough to drive them away. However, Selsam figured out a method: he’s found the proper angle to align his string of rotors at in order to ensure they all have flow, and the optimum spacing for the rotors themselves.
With comparatively very little formal education, Doug Seslam is running circles around some of the best engineers in the world. One day you may see strings of wind rotors stretching across the sky because of his incredible work.
Below are some concept images of how they could look in the future. All images below via Speaker Factory
If you want to find out all the latest news on the environment, why not subscribe to our RSS feed? We’ll even throw in a free album.
You Might Also Like Our Friends' Posts From the Intertubes
“The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else.”
May 14th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Every now and then, something that works well is reverse engineered and the textbooks get rewritten. That’s when man makes his biggest advances!
May 15th, 2008 at 12:16 am
That’s pretty darn cool! It’s always nice to hear about people that don’t have the full education of others, but still do better.
Hope to see it in the deserts of California soon!
May 15th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
This is going to kill a lot of birds. Part of the reason for making huge turbines is so that the speed of the rotor won’t be as fast, so that birds won’t get hit by them.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
That large tower is wasted space. He should put hundreds of turbines in the walls of the tower to capture more wind power.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
His invention does not have 25 seperate turbines and the article states. This invention uses the concept that Having many rotors each putting a small ammount of torque together can power a large single turbine, that requires a large torque to turn. I will give him some credit for finding a way to prevent the turbulance from prop to prop limited, but It really does not defy convention that much. The larger wind power generators have the large rotors to allow slow winds as a energy generating force. Also the first peice of concept art seems to be a very ineffective way to haness any form of wind power.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Excellent example of something I wrote about yesterday ( http://sustainAgility.com/why-are-we-ignoring-moore-s-law/ ).
If we can get the rewards right for folks like Doug Selsam as the entrepreneur as well as the purchasers of the technology we will find ourselves surrounded by solutions.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I agree with the Bill’s statement above… This is like a giant blending machine for California condors, spotted owls etc. This design is not very eco friendly. The short term gains in energy production most likely do not offset the environmental risk inherent in this design. The string design is a cool concept though.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
It’s nice to know that there are people out there thinking about this stuff but this just seems really impractical for a large scale deployment. Small rotors have to turn very fast and generate very little torque. Additional rotors on the same drive shaft will add torque but they still turn very fast and will kill birds like crazy. It’s a cool concept but I don’t think anyone would ever deploy this thing.
I’ve seen other designs that feature large, slow-moving helical collectors that seem much more promising.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
@Bill: the threat posed to birds by many small turbines, especially in a configuration like the first image above shows, doesn’t appear to be greater than that of a single large one. And I somehow suspect that climate change is going to be harder on birds than wind power, in whatever configuration.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
I don’t understand how this is supposed to be better…he has lower windswept area, and makes up for it with more turbines…needs higher windspeeds to get the same power, which is statistically less likely…
if he had a rotor with the same diameter as the length of his line he’d be able to get more power. Granted there will be material & manufacturing price etc, but that’s really an optimization thing… I can’t really think of when this would be an advantage.
are the pictures just poor representations of his design? cause they make the idea look pretty terrible.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Short on detail. I’m not sure what that first picture is supposed to be – is it real or a “concept art” photoshop? Is the rope/axle thing anchored at the other end? Or does it flap in the breeze? What keeps it pointed to the wind direction?
It looks like you need a flexible driveshaft, which means pretty short life for that part?
If the goal is cheap easy construction, why not use a vertical drum turbine? That also lets you pack them together densely, and use guy wires to anchor the top of the vertical axis post for stability so the axle does not have to b as strong.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
An attractive and interesting design, but which sadly doesn’t meet contemporary design requirements. The key one here includes not chopping up Nature’s birds and bats which we want to preserve in order keep down the number of bugs that can effect humans.
Looks like a bird and bat killing Cuisinart to me.
Sorry, it’s nothing more than bit of art. Oh wait, he could create a smaller one to chop up the bugs too! It would be easier just to use the blades which don’t chop up the part of nature which is important not only for a large industry, but for something as important as our food supply.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
It amazes me how cynical people can be when something new is put in front of them. Just accept that it’s a slightly different take on things, which is always good. Part of the problem with science is the constant cock measuring that goes on with scientists themselves. With the energy wasted trying to find flaws in his design, you could have tried coming up with something productive.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
So why don’t you all think outside the box a little more.
Why not place balanced mesh cones around the blades, kind of like a pasta strainer, with the blades tucked inside. That way they deflect the birds.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Interesting… yet I like this one to this floating turbine concept:
http://www.magenn.com
May 16th, 2008 at 1:33 am
Is is true that Leonardo DaVinci did not have a Degree from Harvard or Yale either? Oh my gosh you mean we have to rethink his contributions to the world based on that?
May 16th, 2008 at 1:35 am
Novelties aside, there is also quite serious and innovative small wind energy development happening. Here’s a link to the world’s #1 company by sales $’s in micro-wind. Yes, you could put this in your backyard today.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:36 am
the main issue that no one has brought up is the fact that there will be to much weight for the wind to change the direction of the windmill. if this is placed in a flat area with no trees then maybe, but in the city or anywhere else this is worthless
May 16th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Where is the link that DOQSWP (dog-swap?) mentions?
I would love to see practical wind generating devices for single family homes in areas without much wind. I can live with less power.
May 16th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Geez, and I wasted all that time getting an engineering degree. What was I thinking?
May 17th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Couldn’t agree more Uncle B, this is exactly what I think of this technology that they talk about at hhtp://www.SaveGasSaveEarth.com also. But there’s obviously more to this.
May 18th, 2008 at 1:32 am
he could stand them, individually, on top of buildings- many of them on roofs could do the job.
May 19th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
What happens when the wind isn’t constant? Will the rotors hit the ground (still spinning) every time the wind drops?
May 21st, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Very unique prototype indeed. But also check out our new micro wind turbine called the Motorwind at: Earthority.com. Each is only 20″ in diameter. Thanks.
May 28th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
What kind of bird flies into a stationary fan? My guess is one that won’t be around long anyway.
June 3rd, 2008 at 3:21 am
Some were wondering what would stop the whole thing from falling to the ground when the wind dies down….There’s an article on this device in Popular Science (it may be on their website, i haven’t checked yet) where it is mentioned that there is a balloon at the end of the drive shaft. I’d guess that would also cause the blades to be facing the right way, ie into the wind, right? For more info, try the Popular Science website….i’m just an interested newbie…Andrew
June 13th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
I think this is a very smart way to do business. By the sound of blogs it proves that humans dont like change (let alone by someone with out a degree). This is something that will save a lot of money and reduce the impact on the environment. Something doesn’t have to be enormous to capture wind, because that argument doesn’t hold true for the windmills in west Texas. Anyone with a slight education (elementary school) knows it is windy as hell in the midwest, and yet the the same windmill technology is used as in California!!!
June 15th, 2008 at 5:18 am
Here’s a tip, why don’t you actually ‘read’ the articles before responding? The lower images, as described, are concept art.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:48 am
From what I can tell, the above criticism has nothing to do with the inventor lacking an advanced degree from MIT. One of the most important things taught to us suckers with science degrees is to not blindly accept claims that something is a revolutionary solution to a long standing problem. Peer review is crucial for pointing out potential design flaws so they may be properly addressed. While this process might seem harsh to those not familiar with it, in the end it will lead to the best overall results.
November 9th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Ok, I’m a huge fan of small wind, but this design seems flawed. Clearly there’s benifit to having a long chain of small rotors strung along a flexible line. I like the idea of being able to fly the assembly like a kite. HOWEVER, the idea of suspending the assembly via a ballon? What happens every 3 or 4 days (or 2 weeks) when the ballon comes down? This string of spinning metal blades slams into trees, homes, fences (look out fido!)… smashing all (and it’s self), and then the homeowner reinflates the ballon, fixes dozens of blades, appologizes to the neighbors and re-floats the thing only to repeat the exprience in a few weeks… I don’t think so. The advantage that the towers have is that they run by themselves, with only routine (think scheduled!) maintenance. ‘pratical’ sustainability is required – if we can’t afford to run the machine, it’s not worth running…
February 1st, 2009 at 12:47 pm
It seems that for every technological advance there are always those who want to go backwards.. small turbines do NOT kill birds, bats etc… I have installed over 150 turbines from various manufacturers in the last few years and jave never seen any “air-kill”… if mankind does not react fast, the animal life on this planet will not be there for our grandchildren because global warming will have wiped them out faster than any wind turbine will. The question today is how to reduce or do away with excessive amounts of CO² that is sent into the atmosphere, how to slow down the melting of the ice caps and how to get the Americans to do as much as they can and QUICKLY. (some of our cars here in Europe emit less than 100grams of CO² per Km driven…. an American car pollutes more than eight times one Eurocar does, over here a Prius pays a CO² rate of 4 for taxation purposes, and a Chevy SUV pays a CO² rate of 34… due to the amount of CO² and how much gas it guzzles) I sell wind turbines, I design and build wind and water turbines, I INNOVATE to help our sick and slowly overheating world and have been crying in the dark for over 30 years with not even Al Gore listening in the 1970s… come on lads, be positive, progress is good, the world needs progress to survive
July 6th, 2009 at 1:30 am
Only problem is wind doesn’t work… Wind wont work because the power it generates fluctuates. So you need backup for when? the wind does not blow. So wind farms just put power plants on standby (they still burn there fuel, but do not generate power) until the wind blows again. It doesn’t offset any emissions, in reality, it just adds more in the manufacturing and transporting stages.