"High-altitude winds between 1,640 and 3,281 feet (500 and 10,000 meters) above the ground are stronger and steadier than surface winds. These winds are abundant, widely available, and carbon-free.

"The physics of wind power makes this resource extremely valuable. “When wind speed doubles, the energy it carries increases eightfold, triple the speed, and you have 27 times the energy,” explained Gong Zeqi "

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    The one you posted is not for scaling either. I just dont see how this maintenance overhead could ever scale for mass use.

    • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I don’t know what you mean by mass use. It’s pretty clear that these approaches are meant to add to existing solutions or provide off-grid energy at remote locations.
      If you can bring a standard 30 foot container there, you can consider such a kite installation, if other requirements are met.

      How does an ideal site look like?
      Q3: How does an ideal site look like?
      The ideal site has a flat topography with no large obstacles in the prevailing wind direction, making agricultural or unused land the ideal choice. However, certain obstacles, like trees, solar power plants, or industrial facilities, are acceptable within the operating area, but specific approval may be required. We are happy to support you in identifying the perfect site for your airborne wind energy project.

      I don’t see, you can’t use multiple installations at different locations aka scale it.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Basically every other option will almost always be better, no? I guess we’ll see as someone actually brings some of these to the market but my guess would be that this is not going to go anywhere.

        • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          I can see those kites being used at remote locations, islands, remote villages, etc.
          Add some battery to it and you have a quite reliable source of electric energy.
          What option would be better in these cases in your opinion?

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            I live in remote locations as a digital nomad and this would never really work. The maintenance overhead of even normal ground wind turbines is too much for remote areas. Solar and battery storage is really unbeatable.

            Some new generation wind turbines can be decent ive heard but there are also small novel solutions like mini water turbines can be surprisingly useful.

            • zergtoshi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              Neither the kite based solution nor the blimp based solution is fit for the purpose of serving single or few people with electrical energy.
              For that scenario some kWp based on solar can be had for cheap and some kWh battery on top doesn’t cost a fortune either.
              I never insinuated that the kite or blimp are the perfect solution for every scenario - rather that it may be a match for situation that couldn’t be served well by the available means.