No plugin necessary...
Add wind turbine option to Model S and I'll buy!!
That's really cool! Seems like a lot of work to hoist that thing out every time you need to charge up though. If you live in a windy area where you can put up a small turbine or two you could probably charge from those. At least you could get something out of them, but it may not be worth the cost.
Cool? Yes. Practical? No.
8kWh battery could power Model S about 30 miles.
I'd prefer 10mx10m blanket of thin-film solar cells to that. Even with just 100W/m^2 you would get 10kWh in a hour from that.
In the Netherlands there are several private initiatives to put up large wind turbines.
I've calculated (with a little help) that when I invest € 5000,= (about $ 6750) in a 2MW wind turbine, my little part will be responsible for all the kms/mi I drive on a yearly basis (30000km /19000mi). They pay about 5-6% on the investment as well.
Large wind turbines are much more efficient than the smaller ones.
And also much more noisier. If you invest to such windmill be prepared to wanting to move far away from it.
Yeah. Google "WTS Wind Turbine Syndrome". Infrasound (subsonics) makes people sick, sour, and short of sleep.
These wind turbines usually are not near populated areas but near industrial areas or along water ways where is wind and no people living. There is also a collective of farmers that has some 30 odd wind turbines on their land lined up.
It's not that I use the energy created by the wind turbine, but at least I'm responsible for the energy I use.
There is a movement in politics for a self delivery, so on paper I will get the energy from the wind turbine. These are only plans so far.... but would mean I could reduce the energy bill of my company considerably.
After there is a windmill there area would not be populated for long. I have a friend living nearby two wind turbines about 400m away, and that noise they make is borderline to be annoying. That's about as close you want to be to one of those, not any closer, and those are not very powerful ones, just about 1300MWh/year average each.
It's not just the audible sound, Timo. Subsonic vibration has physiological and neurological effects.
I'm sure that there is a very logical reason that my following "idea" won't work, but just thinking 'out of the box'.
If Tesla added a small fan blade inside the front 'scoop', and the wind motion of driving was turning the fan, which was turning a small elect gererator ....could it generate more energy, than the added drag on the car??
Nope. Tbe increased drag will aways exceed any energy gained from the generation. That a basic law of physics. (2nd law of thermodynamics (which is not limited to just thermodynamics).
Also, you can't stand on a sailboat and blow on the sails to make it go. ;p
Actually the Mythbusters proved that u can blow on the sail from the sail boat and make it go, since the sail will turn some of the wind around and send it backwards. However, it's much more effective to take down the sail and blow the other way directly.
This doesn't prove that there would be any point in a fanblade and generator in the front scoop.
XZERES wind turbines are a good way to charge and power your Tesla Model S. If you have a wind resources of 4.5m/s or 10mph or better. You will be able to charge your Tesla Model S, and/or feed the energy to your grid. XZERES wind turbines are available globally!
@DAVID70: Nope. Tbe increased drag will aways exceed any energy gained from the generation. That a basic law of physics. (2nd law of thermodynamics (which is not limited to just thermodynamics).
Note, however, that the opposite *is* possible: One can save net energy by using compressors to modify the airflow around the car, reducing wind drag:
This is vaguely reminiscent of how Elon's Hyperloop scheme would work.
Holy thread resurrection Batman!
No kidding TA.
I guess what avanti is trying to say is that using compressors can dynamically alter the effective drag coefficient of the car. I guess this may be possible, but would depend on the direction of wind (other than resulting from the car's motion). I doubt that there would be any notable advantage if heading directly into the wind. Overall the best bet is to utilize stationary wind turbines and charging when parked.
There is one other side to using wind turbines. They generate infrasound that is harmful to humans. I don't know about the small size ones, but the big commercial ones certainly do.
So you don't want a wind turbine anywhere close to where you live.
I wonder if microbubbles work in air like they do in water:
"Infrasound" is a myth perpetuated by those who oppose wind-farms. Lots of studies on them and interestingly most who complain are those NOT being paid for the power generated by the farm.
Sad, but true, its a similar phobia to HT power lines, when the reality is that there is more EMF in your house because of all of the wiring (& these days wifi) than the power lines generate at a reasonable distance.
Most people don't understand the inverse square law when it comes to sound.
I'd be perfectly comfortable with a wind-farm within sight - provided that the normal noise level from it was low. I've been next to one and couldn't hear it above the normal background noise, birds, cars, etc.
Of course if a neighbour built one 100m away I might complain - but most are more than 1km away to comply with planning permissions.
Stantondan, Thermodynamics get in the way, but we can agree that a 12 foot turbine mounted on a pylon on the roof of my car would be bitchin'.
Avanti, the hyperloop compressor serves two purposes. To lower the pressure in front of the direction of travel, and to provide an air bearing under the car to provide a nearly frictionless surface. But the energy is provided by the launch linear accelerators and decelarators at the ends of the tube, AND the batteries in the capsule that run the fan and compressor. Should the fan and compressor motor fail, the capsule will stall and become the target of a high speed rear end collision.
@jbunn: the hyperloop compressor serves two purposes. To lower the pressure in front of the direction of travel, and to provide an air bearing under the car to provide a nearly frictionless surface. But the energy is provided by the launch linear accelerators and decelarators at the ends of the tube, AND the batteries in the capsule that run the fan and compressor.
It is the former (lowering the pressure in front of the direction of travel), that is vaguely analogous to the compressor/drag coefficient thing. Only vaguely, as I said. Compressors used in this way effectively make the vehicle partially "transparent" to the wall of air that takes up so much of the energy of a car at high speeds.
If you applied the "air bearing" part of the Hyperloop model to a car, you would have a hovercraft which, of course, is also possible, although rarely practical for various reasons, not the least of which is noise.
@David70: I guess this may be possible, but would depend on the direction of wind (other than resulting from the car's motion). I doubt that there would be any notable advantage if heading directly into the wind.
At high speeds, aerodynamic drag due to vehicle speed dominates energy consumption, and is in addition to any effects due to wind. You need to push all that air out of the way, and that is expensive. THAT is what a compressor can help with. I don't see why it would help any less if you were heading into the wind. The basic problem is still there. Now, of course a strong TAIL WIND would render the scheme less effective, but only because it lowers your air speed, which is what matters.
[Please note that I am not suggesting that the "turbine" idea is practical (although the referenced paper suggests it might be, at least with trucks); just that it does not violate any obvious laws of physics and is fun to think about.]
@Mark E. I have not experienced it personally, so it's based on what I read. There seems to be a lot of controversy around whether wind turbines generate enough infrasound to be harmful. Apparently most of the studies find they don't produce more than regular background infrasound caused by human activity like traffic or natural like waves crashing on the beach.
But in some articles I read, people affected were proponents of green energy and did not have an agenda. As I understand it, people can have various levels of sensitivity to infrasound, from not being bothered by it at all to developing significant neurological disorders. The fact that infrasound affects humans is a documented medical fact, even it's not fully audible.
A simple solution is to build the things away from human settlements.
Ugly, but I would mount a wind turbine on the roof of my MS. Then I could just drive forever. Instead of charging at night, I could drain the battery at night.