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.
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?
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.
The simpler design might lead to lower prices per kWh, which will in the end play a role together with reliability, e.g min/avg power output, durability, outages.
I find it impressive how creative engineers get. Let’s hope for a third option ;)
In the end the TCO (per kWh) will play a major role, especially for big installations and for smaller ones the price floor.
I suppose a helium filled blimp with 12 turbines will be more pricey than a kite with a generator. If the kite fills your need, pick that.
Yah, we need to have them running to get real numbers.
I find both approaches promising.
Ways to make electric energy available without burning fossil fuel are good.
Fair, but please name one single way to generate that kind of electrical power that can be fixed by a layperson in case something crashes.
How so, when skysails talks about “Venyo harnesses the power of high-altitude winds with speeds of 13 m/s and a continuous output of up to 200 kW.” while the S1500 is featured with “Inside this duct are 12 turbine-generator sets, each rated at 100 kW.”?
It’s more like factor 5-6.
You want this but with kites?
Here you go: https://skysails-power.com/how-power-kites-work/
This one in particular: maybe.
The approach in gerenal: not so much.
Have a look here: https://skysails-power.com/systems/venyo/
It’s a novel approach, but the Chinese aren’t the only ones trying to harvest energy from high winds: https://skysails-power.com/how-power-kites-work/
I think so too.
With electric energy, there’s no “one size fits all” solution.
These novel approaches will fit somewhere.