Directorly Downwind Faster than the Wind

[FreeEnergy]

a vertical wind turbine would probably work better!

[ramset]

Cloxxi
Quote:

If you see a car, or a building without turbine, energy is being wasted right there.
----------------------------
Very true ,we are spoiled ,if wind was all we had we would never waste it.

The tides and the wind they never stop!

HHmmmmm...............

Chet

[Cloxxki]

So much can be done with a square kilometer of great tide height difference water.
Float a flat, light vessel on it. It is 5 metres thick and water won't penetrate it.
At low tide, engage anchors to the ocean floor. At hight tide (fully submerged 5 metres), softly allow the surface to float up. Per quare meter of water, that's for instance 5m x 1000kg. For the square kilometer, 1 million times that. And, twice per day. On top if this, water turbines could line the circumference of the vessel, covering a significant depth under the vessel, where strong tidal streams will exist. A bit of water sloshing through a small bay sized area, might power hundreds of thousands of houses.
Take a rugby ball of, what 3 litres?, and bring it to the bottom of the swimming pool (rarely more than 4 metres dee). That's the power you're dealing with here, just about 2 billion times more. And yes, twice a day.
The quick release at the bottom sees a lot of energy going lost on water friction, the ball doesn't jump up all that high. Doing it slowly, can definately do serious work connected to a machine to make use of it.

Greatest obstable is being awarded a square kilometers of stride tide water, and funding to build.

Oh I failed to mention the wind park on the vessel, and the solar cells. Terrawatts in total, rain or shine.

[Cloxxki]

Guys, your opinions please, after having looked at the cart.

Take this : http://eolprocess.com/
And substitute the blades with a prop, powered by the rotation of the central shaft.

Can you see what I'm seeing? Can you perhaps tell me why it won't work?

The wind turbine booster we've been looking for? The design itself is ingenious by itself, but it seems to be (although working beautifully in a seperately invented version of gmeast :
http://www.youtube.com/user/gmeast

restricted by the blade taking full wind, not wanting to go faster than the wind, while in all other positions, it does want. The prop, if it operates somewhat efficient off the wind, would be urging the central shaft, and all the props installed, to go faster. Sucking the air out of the wind, just like the cart does. Or am I wrong?

Another way I see is that the blades would not make full rotations, but alternate taking left and right, for fore and aft locations. Speed vs. torque, which is best? For the cart, speed. For the turbine, I am not sure.

[ramset]

Clo,
That device appears to be a low speed high torque device!

I didn't translate.

what are they claiming verses a regular prop?

BTW I don't understand your idea {yet].

Chet