Our website would like to use cookies to store information on your computer. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but parts of the site will not work as a result. Find out more about how we use cookies.
Renew-Reuse-Recycle
9th Dec 2019 Login  
Alternatives to Proven 15
by Tony Smith at 2010-09-24 08:16:15 (Forum::Public::Wind)
Planner suggesting I look for different model
Hi,

An initial discussion with the local planning dept suggested that they are worried about noise from the Proven 15s. Its not clear whether they have received actual complaints, or whether they are just not happy about the data from the manufacturers. (Understandably a planning officer wouldn't want to discuss specifics of other applications with me).

Meanwhile he was suggesting that I might want to look for a quieter machine, and apparently its preferred if they are less than 20m to the tip.

I haven't yet managed to speak to Environmental Health who would be assessing noise for the planners. They may be able to give me more specifics.

Can anyone shed any light on the noise situation? Its frustrating that none of the manufacturers provide the source noise data that's actually needed (noise at 10m/s)

Also, any suggestions as to alternatives if the Proven is unsuitable for my site?

--
aesmith

Mail this to a friend
Alternatives to Proven 15 Tony Smith - 2010-09-24 08:16:15
Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 scott smith - 2010-09-25 20:32:06
i would have thought there would be better reasons to consider a diffrent turbine than thats what planning thought
if you read the forums it hard to find anyone with a good word to say about them
theirs footage on youtube of ones with blades come of them as recently as last winter
maybe the planning are tryin to do you a favour :-)
--
scotty82
Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Tony Smith - 2010-09-26 10:12:06
I spoke to Environmental Health at length on Friday. The issue is this "Noise Label" that Proven have now published in their Accoustic Performance document.

Based on those figures Environmental Health are specifying a minimum separation of 320m from a single turbine to the nearest neighbour. Distances from clusters of two or three would be greater of course.

Regarding the other comments, the poor initial record of the Proven has been widely commented on, but they have the installed base and reference sites etc.

--
aesmith

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 scott smith - 2010-09-26 12:34:05
yep, and there were reference sites in 2004 that did nothin for turbines installed in 2005
reference sites in 2005 that meant nothin in 2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
etc etc
its less than a year since folk had blades comin off in not very strong winds (see youtube) and its not even been a windy winter since then
i know of some folk that had this turbine in 2006 and before and everytime it got fixed that was supposed to be it with the latest all tested parts
1 week later and it was broken again
if i were havin 1 I would want to have seen it run through about 5 proper winters not 1 or even no winter that was 1 of the calmest in livin memory!
--
scotty82
Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Tony Smith - 2010-09-27 08:51:40
It's true I haven't yet visited the reference sites that were offered, so I don't know what the actual owners will have to say.

I guess it still comes back to what are the alternatives? Plenty of people are ready to knock the Proven, without suggesting anything.

One supplier was recommending "C & F". I don't know if they have reference sites, but if not it would be more or less ordering straight from the drawing board.
--
aesmith

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 blo - 2010-10-01 19:55:06
15kW. Don't think so!

http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=4501&page=1#Item_0
--
blo

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Tony Smith - 2010-10-02 11:29:16
Cheers. It appears to me that Proven have "lost the plot" hopefully only temporarily. We have applications stalled in Aberdeenshire for lack of credible noise data. Also operational installations who haven't been able to get parts or service. And for example the only contact I have made at Proven is interested only in "Wind Crofting", not in supply for our own installation. Even their web site is falling apart with specification links pointing to non-existent pages.

They need to pull their finger out.

Regarding the rating, I think that's a bit of a side issue, at least for us. The price of a Proven "15" is roughly comparable to other 10 or 11kW rated machines, so you could see the 15kW maximum as a bonus.
--
aesmith

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 scott smith - 2010-10-21 22:56:24
how can you compare the 10 or 11 kw rating of 1 machine with a 15 kw peak of another?
any turbine that is rated at one kw will likely do a lot more kw if you wanted it to
you would need to compare rated power with rated power or peak power with peak power not rated power with peak power
does anyone else say peak power anyway or is it just a cover up that the 15 kw only does 12.8 or 10.5?
--
scotty82
Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 scott smith - 2010-11-07 14:12:25
i see the 12.8 kw proven has vanished from there website
just the 10.5 kw one left now
any idea why?

--
scotty82

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Peter - 2010-11-11 22:55:44
Here's a recent acoustics report for the current Bergey 10kW Excel turbine.

____

Peter

Attachments...
Word document (1Mb limit) Bergey Excel-S Acoustics Report 2010
PDF file (3Mb limit) Bergey Excel-S 10kW
Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Peter - 2010-11-11 22:59:40
I should have said, the main Bergey agent in the UK & Ireland is SIAC Wind Energy, part of the large Irish construction group - /www.siacwindenergy.com.
_____

Peter

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 scott smith - 2010-11-14 12:20:34
that noise stuff looks no use for the uk as its not mcs
i heard that all data and claims must all be same look so u can compare it and theirs meant to be a color chart saying how far u can put it from houses
this stuff dosnt have that so no use i guess

--
scotty82

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Tony Smith - 2010-11-14 15:06:42
Our local Environmental Health don't work off those colour coded distance charts. And just as well, as they would be way over what I consider acceptable noise limits.

Locally they look for either less than 35dB(A) at 10m/s (the "simplified assessment"), or to allow a bit more slack they assess the predicted noise against an assumed background noise. To do this all they need is the source noise which is given in that document.

If the machine's not MCS approved then that a different matter, and rules it out in any case.
--
aesmith

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Jonathan Hirst - 2010-12-01 13:19:21
septic tank man The alternative could be somthing else
Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Tony Smith - 2010-11-12 09:02:46
Thanks for the comments. I've finally received the long awaited updated noise data for the Proven 35-2, but it only knocks a couple of dB off the previous figures. So still too noisy for my site.

Unfortunately we've had another blow in that an application has gone in for two 800kW turbines right next to us. If these go ahead then they'll "max out" the noise over the entire neighbourhood. The last application in this area took over two years to be determined so we are absolutely stalled for the foreseeable future,

This application is from one of the most hard-nosed developers around here, and an unfortunate side effect of the way he goes about his business is that it has turned virtually the whole local community against wind turbines of any sort.
--
aesmith

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Peter Griffiths - 2010-11-24 10:56:15
Tony,

You are of course correct to seek as much information as possible before you go ahead with a purchase.

The Proven 35-2 will be fully certified in December, prior to the shut off of the Transitional List, after which there is some uncertainty over how the list will be moved forward. All formal data will be available for this wind turbine then.

I'm happy to help with any interim information you need on this machine but let me be honest with you from the off, I represent Proven Energy and for that reason I will not comment on our competitor's machines. I find this unprofessional and unacceptable.

I'm happy to forward you a checklist of questions that it is sensible for those choosing between turbines to ask. Please contact me direct if you think this would help you.

Finally I'm happy to make representation to the planning department on your behalf if you think this will help.

Peter Griffiths
Proven Energy
peter.griffiths@provenenergy.com

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Peter - 2010-11-29 15:38:45
Tony,

I suggest you take a look at the Guide available on this site here at the Turbine Buyers Guide.


Personally, I have a 10kW Bergey, which has had no down time since install 4 years ago and produces, on average 14,000 kWh p.a. on my site in North Yorkshire (5.2 m/s). A neighbour with the same turbineon a better site has been averaging between 17,000 - 18,000 kWh p.a.

Hope this helps.

___________________

Peter

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Peter - 2010-11-29 15:39:53
Tony,

I suggest you take a look at the Guide available on this site here at the Turbine Buyers Guide.


Personally, I have a 10kW Bergey, which has had no down time since install 4 years ago and produces, on average 14,000 kWh p.a. on my site in North Yorkshire (5.2 m/s). A neighbour with the same turbine on a rather better site has been averaging between 17,000 - 18,000 kWh p.a.

Hope this helps.

___________________

Peter

Re: Alternatives to Proven 15 Cris Gavin - 2010-12-14 14:45:45
i know the Gaia-Wind 11kW turbine breaks the 20m height that they mentioned but from a noise perspective it is extremely quiet compared to a Proven and also seems to greatly out-produce the Proven turbines in my area. The Gaia up the road from me had produced 16 MWh over the summer which is the same amount as the Proven 15kW next door to it produced in it's first year
--
gavstamp
If you'd like to post comments on this site, just register here

Powered by Novacaster