Oh lord I wake up and find a burning bag of dog poop on the electronic doormat. When will these kids learn... Gonna be a sec before I get my coffee this morning, to be sure. >Ian said, in his post on Fantasy Wind Turbine Claims: > >Newbies and others, > >Much of the advice below from goes against that of >almost all experienced, professional wind generator sales and >installation professionals I know (and I know plenty). > And Greg says: That is because installation professionals have a vested interest in you spending 4 times or MORE on installing your system and solar is, without question, 20 times more expensive than a home-built wind gen system and wind gens from professional installers, who let's be sure, do a fine job, but still - that job in exchange for the elbow grease you could have applied, makes that cost 4-12 times more expensive than if you did it yourself. Ian and I have already debated this audit and he lost, folded and went away. >Ian said: I don't have time or interest in debating this point by point, but it >needs to be said that long messages on a public forum do not truth >make. Greg says: Gee Ian, ya just called me a liar, and so let me say that Editor's of magazines who sell solar ads and large wind gen ads, do not have the interests of their readers at heart and tell me dear Ian, when was the last time your magazine ran an article on carving your own prop and erecting a gen and saving thousands of dollars on the installation. The system we teach at the class, designed by a NASA Physicist with FOUR DECADES of Wind Tunnel testing, FOUR DECADES of working on spy planes, FOUR DECADES, probably longer than you dear Ian, or have been alive, is laid out for people free - when they buy the CD we charge for that...but really...I have no vested 'financial' interest in lying to people, YOU DO and I really do not appreciate the accusation. I am amazed and saddened that your publisher would hire YOU to run HOME POWER MAGAZINE, which from what I have seen, is the absolute WORST place to get advice on solar and wind - you might was well go ask a solar manufacturer which is better, solar or wind. RUN AN ARTICLE ON BUILDING IT YOURSELF IAN - I'LL GIVE YOU THE CD CLASS WE SELL AT THE SITE FOR FREE IF YOU POST IT ON YOUR SITE FOR CUSTOMERS TO DOWNLOAD FOR FREE. PUT YOUR MONEY AND YOUR MAGAZINE WHERE YOUR LYING MOUTH IS AND GIVE IT TO READERS FREE IAN - YOU WON'T BECAUSE THAT WOULD SEND YOUR ADVERTISERS SCREAMING TO THE PHONES. At eduhosting we don't really make much off selling anything, from the free PC classes to kids to the free wind gen articles. We don't use a paid advertising base at the site to muddy the facts. Our goal isn't the buck or we'd starve. Our goal is the education and we have students, like Srianie in South America, (see photos at our site) who have little money, yet are making huge towers and is teaching others. If he can do it, an American, Canadian, Brit or Aussie can do it. Hey, then there is the tribal leader in Kenya doing it with the class we taught. Talk about a shoestring budget. Ian you are really out to lunch here....how many people around the globe has Hugh Piggot taught who do it for a fraction of the cost your magazine suggests is required? Your mission is a buck and clearly not the education of the reader. And if our suggestions were so bad, explain the hundreds and hundreds of great feedback letters from happy students, also at our site. I'd love to see your pile, posted, on how many people read your magazine and did it for less than the methods we teach. So to eliminate any question that 'we are in it for the money' or that you mislead readers with inaccurate information due to your financial interest in ads you sell, put our class at your site for readers to download FREE Ian. I'll give you a copy. YOU WON'T BECAUSE YOU'RE A SNAKE - AS ROTTEN AN EDUCATOR AS I HAVE EVER MET IN MY THREE DECADES OF TEACHING. You are a carpet bagging salesman who peddles ads and caters to advertisers or you'd run the class. THAT SINGLE FAILURE on your part is the ACID TEST of your true intention and the readers here and at your rag can judge that easy enough. When it comes to holding a position of power, a senior editor such as yourself, and doing your readers the ultimate disservice in hiding the truth from them that in fact they can do it for much less in their garage than buying all that gear from installers who also have an interest in charging high rates and installing top grade equipment, marked up appropriatly. AT LEAST THE INSTALLERS PROVIDE A SERVICE - for people who don't want to do it themselves, installers are a valuable part of the equation, even required in some communities. SO LET'S CUT THE MUSTARD RIGHT HERE. YOU CAN, AS A HOMEOWNER, SAVE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS DOING IT YOURSELF. Ian knows this and stopped debating the point weeks ago and now has decided to crawl out from under a rock and defend his advertisers - good for you dude. But it was at the expense of your readers and visitors here and is beyond misleading. You've called me a liar and as a law clerk who worked for a Federal Judge, you are about to find the wrath of litigation crawling right up your backside if you ever do that again. I am 19 and 0 in court dude - you wanna make that record a nice round 20 so I can publish those results here as well? Watch your slandering mouth or I may even do you boys twice... And if you want to talk about black eyes, telling people, like Don in Tulsa, a machinist who loves fine tuning a gen, telling Americans that they don't have the skills and ingeniuty to do it themselves and save, is the silliest idiocy I have read in print in a long time. It is insulting and makes your magazine look like what it obviously is: a forum for selling ads, not helping people attain energy independence. >Ian said: >Roof and building mounting are a mistake, and will continue to give >the wind energy industry a black eye, as they have for years. >If you can't afford to buy or aren't allowed to have a tower that >gets your turbine well above surrounding obstructions, don't bother >with wind energy. There are other, better ways to apply your desire >to use renewable energy. GREG SAYS: AND THAT IAN, IS A HALF TRUTH - CONGRATULATIONS IAN, YOU HAVE HALF-A-BRAIN AND HALF THE ETHICS YOU SHOULD HAVE FOR BEING HALF-HONEST. A ROOF MOUNTED SYSTEM IS NOT AS QUIET AS A TOWER. THAT IS OBVIOUS TO ANYONE WITH AN ENGINEERING BONE IN THEIR BODY. GOOD RUBBER CAN HELP, BUT AS PAUL GIPE CLEARLY SAID IN SIMILAR TONES AS YOU, HEIGHT IS KING IN WIND GEN SYSTEMS AND AS SUCH, IF YOU USE YOUR HOME AS PART OF THE BASE OF YOUR GEN, YOU STILL NEED TO GET SOME HEIGHT FOR IT TO BE EFFECTIVE. How high? 33 feet produces about 1/2 the power as a 100 foot tower. so with a 4 cornered home, pushing your towers 33 feet above the roof line (assume a 1 story) you are at 50 feet high, which will produce power nicely. I wouldn't put the base on the roof. Personally, I would put it down the side of the structure on a 20 foot waterpipe, tied to the structure if you must with plenty of rubber. I would agree with you ian (don't faint, although it is fine with me if you puke, since that is how i felt reading your post), i would agree that a base on the roof is a bad idea...all the shock and vibration bein transferred to the home. Isolate that with a ground based pipe down the side on a rubber strap to the home and you will have eliminated most of the vibration and gained some strength in the tower with the stability of the home. that said, guy wires to the yard (not roof) are wise and anything tied to the home itself needs shock and vibration dampning; both nylon and rubber work. As a home owner you SHOULD BE CAUTIOUS AND HESITANT about putting a 5 HP motor/generator in each corner of your home. It is the LAST PLACE you want to generate power - next to where you sleep, eat, enjoy TV or classical music. Put it on a tower if you can away from the home. If it were my home I would never mount to my structure. Ian and Paul have valid points on that to be sure. I'd use a tower...BUT If I had no other place and was sick of blowing $100s on electric bills, or if I had a multi-unit apartment complex with a nice high roof, I would, without hesitation, mount towers on the roof in each corner, well dampened. In the other article and at the site, we had a noise dampening method that gave ZERO, as in NONE, NADA, ZIP noise and vibration. There are others. Americans (and Canadians) aren't stupid Ian...in fact I am still reeling at your insult, not just hurled at me, but at their IQ. Get a clue dude - your kind of thinking is what has kept us tied to gridfed power - the title of the magazine you work for is a joke when you examine the staff who runs it and the lack of editorial you actually deliver for people who can't afford $50,000.00 systems and want to do it themselves. >Ian said: You don't try to get a sun tan on a rainy day. You don't try to raise >vegetables on rock. You don't drive your sports car on a hiking >trail. You don't put PVs in the shade. GREG SAYS: YOU DON'T TAKE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY ADVICE ON WIND POWER FROM A GUY WHO PEDDLES SOLAR PANEL ADS. >Ian said: Sure, you can _try_ any of >these things, and you might have some limited success. GREG SAYS: 4 GENS WITH 12 FOOT DIAMETERS CAN EASILY UNPLUG ALMOST ANY HOME FROM THE GRID AND YOU CAN DO THIS FOR AN AFFORDABLE PRICE IF DONE OUT OF YOUR GARAGE. And if you unplug, that isn't a 'limited success'. That is a solid win for your finances and the environment. >Ian said: But those of us in the business of promoting a sustainable wind industry (as >opposed to getting people excited about it at any cost, or making a >buck) will continue to encourage people to be realistic about what >can and can't be done with wind energy, and how to sensibly apply the >technology. GREG SAYS: I won't knock the other AE magazines, since I haven't heard them say a word against home brew methods yet, but obviously those of you at Home Power who sell ads, do NOT want to get people excited about wind power and it's benefits. Shame on you. They are certainly livid and steaming under the collar about rising oil prices. A little excitement about wind power is a good thing or do you disagree with that Ian? And education to save tens of thousands of dollars - another good thing....don't you agree? And the ability to choose a professional installer or do it yourself if you have time and the energy - that CHOICE is also a good thing, right Ian? Or would you disagree with those statements? >Ian said: Smooth, powerful wind is well above trees and buildings. To quote a >seasoned wind energy dealer, from an interview you'll see in Home >Power later this year: " In summary, use the tallest tower you can, >use the tallest tower you can, and use the tallest tower you can." > GREG SAYS: you bet - oh boy Ian, I am gonna faint, you actually laid out a tiny smidgen of edu material in your long winded post. >Ian closed with: Best, >Ian And I agree. That is about the best you can or ever will do for your readers or the people here. You will attempt to discourage inexpensive systems with lies to protect your advertising base and my friend - that won't fly here. Not for two seconds. Do it again and I'll rip your philosophy of 'expensive home power' (what your magazine teaches) up one side and down the other...every single time. Do it again and we shall again debate and expose the facts on this matter - that is a good thing. Do it again and you shall find out just how bad a black eye I will give you for insulting the garage engineers out there who have done it at home just fine for centuries until we all got addicted to oil. Let's quote a Brit who recently posted this fine article: >England has had windmills since at least 1185, my farming cousin still >has one of the "old sort" to grind his animal feed. His and my >Gt Grandfather fitted up the farm with hydropower about 1850, >which ran for nearly 100 years. What the politicos do not >realise that until Col.Drake sank his oil well, much of >civilisation ran on AE, wind by land and sea, horses for >transport, solar for crop drying and in Chile for water >purification. Water power for milling and forges.True we had >coal, and coal gas, and railways from about 1825, > >We too have myopic politicians, not least because they are >wedded to "central energy provision" whereas AE is all about >/_dispersed _/energy collection. As my grandfather used to say >"God helps him who helps himself" [to which he often added "and >God help him if I find him at it" !!] And of course we have our >political clowns too, eg "Pants Down Prescott" if you have been >reading the popular press here recently. > >God Bless America too, God Save the Queen, and God save us all >from stupid politicians !! > >best regards > >Andrew Stobart >www.grunweb.org.uk GREG SAYS: AND SO IT IS OBVIOUS THAT HOME BUILT GARAGE ENGINEERED POWER IS, WAS FOR CENTURIES AND ALWAYS WILL BE THE MOST RELIABLE, CHEAPEST AND MOST COMMON METHOD FOR HARNESSING NATURE. And silly misleading senior editor Ian, if you'd like to argue that fact or the fact that we have helped people develop home built installations all over the world and Hugh Piggot has laid the ground work for even more at the University level no less, ALL OVER THE WORLD, go right ahead and argue away,..you've proven you are a charlatan and your rag is a mouth-piece for expensive gear - that is natural. Now please, prove it over and over and over to the rest of the world by baiting me into another debate...my pleasure I assure you.