Follow this blog:
RSS

‘Stealth’ wind turbines avoid aviation radar interference

By | November 2, 2009, 12:21 PM PST

The spinning blades of wind turbines have been known to scramble the radar waves needed to track airplanes. Two European companies have partnered to apply radar-absorbing materials to wind turbines in an attempt to fix the problem.

Danish outfit Vestas and U.K. defense tech contractor QinetiQ say they are building wind turbines whose blades are made with glass-reinforced epoxy and plastic foam, which produces a smaller radar signature during testing.

(SmartPlanet previously wrote about QinetiQ when it won a contract to power overseas U.S. Army bases with garbage.)

The technology could help wind farms avoid problems with their turbines deflecting short-wave radar — so disruptive that, at times, the turbines can completely wipe an aircraft from a controller’s screen.

Technology Review describes the problem:

Wind turbines can interfere with radar in several ways. The turbines can reflect the radar systems’ microwave signals, creating a shadow that erases airplanes from radar operators’ screens and clutters those screens with the turbines’ signature. The signature is also always changing, as blades accelerate and decelerate with the wind, reaching speeds of well over 200 kilometers per hour. Aviation safety and military authorities insist that the potential for confusion and accidents is real.

But a Homeland Security study published last year (.pdf) found that the technology still hasn’t made much of an impact in preventing disruption of long-wavelength L-band radars used by U.S. air traffic control officials. Vestas said it has demonstrated an L-band radar absorber.

Absorbing radar is not as easy as simply painting the wind turbine blades. A five-millimeter coating could add 1,200 kilograms to large turbine blades, notes Technology Review. Even if weight parity is achieved, there’s still a cost premium to consider.

But for some wind farms whose operation has been blocked by the U.S. government over concern of disrupted radar waves — a troubled 130-turbine wind farm in Cape Cod, for example — the radar-absorbing technology might do the trick.

In the meantime, fingers are crossed that aging radar systems will soon be upgraded with new algorithms to handle the existence of wind farms on their screens.

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Andrew Nusca

About Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca is editor of SmartPlanet.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca

Editor

Andrew Nusca is editor of SmartPlanet and an associate editor for ZDNet. Previously, he worked at Money, Men's Vogue and Popular Mechanics magazines. He holds degrees from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and New York University. He based in New York but resides in Philadelphia.

Follow him on Twitter.

Andrew Nusca

Andrew Nusca
Andrew Nusca does not hold any investments in the companies he covers.
8
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Stealth' wind turbines avoid aviation radar interference
fingers are crossed is a stupid remark to make on an otherwise excellent piece.superstition and science do not go together.
Posted by ronangel
3rd Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
boondoggles
Wind is not a good way to go. It rarely makes power when you need it and it's an environmental disaster.

In my region the graft and corruption surrounding a bunch of "wind farms" which aren't hooked to any grid (and don't ever have to be for the interested parties to get paid) is being investigated by the state Attorney General.

Our congressman just caught wind of $77 million in fed money that "fell from the sky" into the developer's pockets, and I say again; there is NOTHING in any contract that requires these things to ever make one watt of electricity.

Wind is a rip off, and the most disgusting eyesore to boot. But then what else is new?

Oh, by the way, all that money... went to an overseas company. Very little of this "federal stimulus" money remained in the US. I understand that's the same with a lot of other "stimulus" projects.

It's as if this is how they are 'making whole' foreigners who lost their shirt when the banksters lied to them and sold them useless junk that their cronies had rated "AAA" in order to set up this present "recession," the greatest robbery in the history of the planet, by many magnitudes.

Sorry guys, but all true.
Posted by pgit
3rd Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Stealth' wind turbines avoid aviation radar interference
Who is working on the environmental impact of tall (300 ft), high-tip-speed (200+ mph) wind turbines?

The most recent estimate I read regarding bird kills, for instance, is approximately 1 million kills per year in the U.S. with just the currently installed wind turbine population.
(I seem to recall that raptors are the highest proportion of the kills.)
Birds are a critical dimension of our overall ecosystems, strongly affecting human food production through their control of insects and rodents, even though they are consumers of some products.
Industry estimates of bird kills are less but only by perhaps half, and their evaluations (counts of dead birds in measured areas near turbines), are criticized for not being extensive enough (areas of search are too small about the base of any one turbine.)

For these and other reasons I have strong reservations about the desirability of wind turbines relative to the advantages of distributed* solar-electric, and distributed* direct-solar-heating (e.g. home air and water warming/heating - two of the largest consumer energy demands in currently industrialized societies).
(* Distributed = small point sources incorporated into just about every node of the consumer network.)

Reasons for reservations about wind include: environmental harm (e.g. bird kills), and aesthetic and psychological disadvantages (e.g. contamination of natural settings and annoying prop-wash sounds**. Birds kills are also an aesthetic loss. (non one should take aesthetic loss lightly. It are a profound component of quality of life community and personal.)
There is also the severe practical and technical problem of phasing solar and wind electrical supply with demand: e.g. at night, and on cloudy and windless days.
** A small wind farm near me in the Finger Lakes area of New York, USA, has already generated extensive community criticism for the sounds of prop-wash.

Nuclear has serious problems, (some of which are resolvable with technical advances and political agreements, e.g., fuel recycling and waste storage, and possible associations with weapons manufacture), but it's environmental footprint is relatively small, and it is able to respond to demand instantly, whereas wind and solar electric require as yet massive (pumped water reservoirs), or otherwise currently unattainable means of energy storage for controlled release*** during periods (phases) when the sun is not shining and the wind not blowing, if the ever-ready power supply expectations to which we've become accustomed with coal and hydro-electric sources are to be equaled.
Nuclear reactor safety is indeed a concern but manageable, as the hundreds of global instances of safe long-term operation have shown.
Note that the annual safe-operation release of air-born radioactive elements by a nuclear plant has been shown to be considerably smaller if not miniscule relative to the air-born release by a plant burning coal.
*** The controlled time-release or flow of energy from a higher to a lower potential is the definition of ?power?.)

Comments will be appreciated
Respectfully,
JM
Posted by JamesEMarks
3rd Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
Other turbine types should be considered
Vertical-axis, modified savonius turbines, which are quiet and harmless to birds and bats, are generally dismissed as an alternative because of their "low efficiency". While it's true that their mechanical efficiency is lower - they extract less power from a given amount of wind - the wind is free, so that type of efficiency is of little importance. What matters is power production vs cost; and savonius turbines are cheaper to construct and maintain, and can operate in higher wind speeds when propeller-type turbines have to be shut down. They are also less affected by turbulence, making them suitable for many more locations.

Of course, power companies prefer large, centralized power production facilities where they control the supply. Simple, cheap wind turbines that anyone can install they see as a threat to their profits.

The technical challenges of energy storage appear to be less than the challenges of trying to safely store nuclear waste and clean up the environmental impacts of uranium mining. The technology to do the former is available, while the ability to safely isolate nuclear waste until it ceases to be a hazard is purely speculative.

The time frame to bring nuclear on-line is much too long, and the needed investment much too large, for it to be useful in combating global warming. The money would be better spent elsewhere.
Posted by Greenknight_z
4th Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Stealth' wind turbines avoid aviation radar interference
Wind energy is the way to go and while most people raise concerns about bird deaths, the new wind farms have different rotter. These are large and spin slowly, most companies also avoid placing wind farms in the migratory path of birds. Wind energy technology is rather new and as it develops it will only improve and be safer to birds and man. I think we need to encourage companies like Pacific Crest Transformers that are currently doing a fab job.
Posted by RogerRoster
6th Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Stealth' wind turbines avoid aviation radar interference
Wind energy is the way to go and while most people raise concerns about bird deaths, the new wind farms have different rotter. These are large and spin slowly, most companies also avoid placing wind farms in the migratory path of birds. Wind energy technology is rather new and as it develops it will only improve and be safer to birds and man. I think we need to encourage companies like Pacific Crest Transformers that are currently doing a fab job.
Posted by RogerRoster
6th Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
Efficiency
On top of the problems discusses with Wind Technology is the fact that it really depends on where they are located whether or not they can be efficent. In Wisconsin Windmills are only 30% efficent. Just not enough wind to drive them. Wind turbines have a way to go yet. We will have to probably have to employ a variety of technologies to get enough energy. There are drawbacks as well as pluses to every technology.
Posted by pizzaman7
17th Nov 2009
+1 Vote
+ -
RE: 'Stealth' wind turbines avoid aviation radar interference
Hard to believe that we forget that we can use water to power turbines but again the environmental impact of building a dam; well we all know that story.

I think that the only way to go is the extraction of hydrogen from water to power our needs.. Let's see. Start the extraction of hydrogen from another source.. say wind power, once the hydrogen resources have built up to sufficient levels use the hydrogen to power the extraction process and the remainder to supply power to homes, businesses etc. Have I seen any analysis on efficiencies etc.. no.
Yes we'll get the doomsayers telling everone that hydrogen is dangerous. To this, no more dangerous than gasoline, nuclear fuels, propane, etc..

Yep, hydrogen seems that way to go.
Posted by michael.burgess@...
19th Nov 2009
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet Community and join the conversation! Signing-up is free and quick, Do it now, we want to hear your opinion.