Massive 853-foot-tall wind turbines are coming to America's East Coast

Massive 853-foot-tall wind tur...
The Haliade-X turbines stand 260 meters (853 ft) tall, and will feature as part of the US' first large-scale offshore wind farm
The Haliade-X turbines stand 260 meters (853 ft) tall, and will feature as part of the US' first large-scale offshore wind farm
View 2 Images
The Haliade-X turbines stand 260 meters (853 ft) tall, and will feature as part of the US' first large-scale offshore wind farm
The Haliade-X turbines stand 260 meters (853 ft) tall, and will feature as part of the US' first large-scale offshore wind farm
Each Haliade-X turbine can generate up to 67 GWh (Gigawatt hours) annually, which is reportedly enough to power up to 16,000 European households
Each Haliade-X turbine can generate up to 67 GWh (Gigawatt hours) annually, which is reportedly enough to power up to 16,000 European households

America's first "commercial scale" offshore wind energy project has decided to use GE's colossal Haliade-X turbines, the world's largest and most powerful. Standing 853 ft (260 m) high – as tall as an 85-story building – with a 722-foot (220 m) rotor, each one can power a home for two days with one spin.

The Vineyard Wind 1 project, an 800 MW renewable energy project, will place a number of these monster turbines some 15 miles off the South coast of Martha's Vineyard, an island off Massachusetts, to take advantage of the strong winds off the East coast of the United states. It'll power about 400,000 houses in New England, expecting to become active sometime in 2023.

Each Haliade-X turbine is a self-contained 12-13 megawatt generator in its own right, capable of generating 67 gigawatt-hours annually under perfect conditions. Making them so huge is key; not only do those 351-foot (107 m) long blades capture some 45 percent more energy than anything else on the market, it's also more effective at lower wind speeds, making its output more predictable. Also, using fewer, larger turbines cuts down significantly on installation costs.

Vineyard Wind 1 might be the largest offshore wind project in America, but its 800 MW capacity lags far behind the world's largest offshore wind project – the 3.6 gigawatt Dogger Bank project in the UK, which will use the same GE turbines. How does that compare to onshore? Well, the world's largest wind project overall is China's Gansu wind farm, with a planned capacity of some 20 gigawatts – although according to The New York Times, political factors have rendered it "mostly idle."

Check out a short video about the Haliade-X turbine below.

World’s Most Powerful Offshore Wind Turbine | Haliade-X | GE Renewable Energy

Source: Vineyard Wind

Wow, nice! We need some of these beast here in South Dakota, we have a ton of turbines, but nothing like these. That said, many windy days have a lot of turbines sitting idle, what we really need in a giant Tesla battery like they installed in Australia.
A repeat of previous rants various to sites various,
including the esteamed ODA:
I here again note to the waiting throng:

1: Errr yes higher is:
.1: More efficient at capturing wind.
.2: It's more efficient at capturing low level off-course aircraft also.
2: All stationary structures in water are:
.1: Potential prang points for boats off course also.
.2: Mast bases can be turned into a virtuous points -
Why not turn the bases contain refuges for the boats that have bumped into them/got into prob's other?
3: Finally for this:
(see Greeks, Chinese, South Asian various ancient + current era Mediterranean islands various + Dutch + English)
This design:
Reduces rotor diameter for same output to same wind conditions
because partially it, obviously, captures more wind
It provides a more balanced rotor by mostly cancelling the 'back-effect' of the post to passing blade.
+ + +
Things to do on a blowy day near 3 blade vertical post windmills:
> Watch a 3 blader go round from a frontal view especially.
> You'll see the blade passing in front of the post deflect slightly.
> Go and buy an ice cream and think why - ?
I generally agree with Wonky Klerky's criticisms. Add this: those giant blades do not last forever and they are not recyclable. Also, I am very glad NOT to be involved with maintenance, should anything go wrong with a heavy generator that is some 490 feet up.
How many skyscrapers are taller than the 1500+ feet of these things?
It's cool, but... offshore wind is one of the most expensive methods of generating electricity; more so when you account for its lower capacity factor compared to baseload power plants, and intermittent power generation that must be made up by diesel or natural gas load-following power plants. In the footprint of just the tower of one Haliade-X wind turbine, you could fit a dozen NuScale small modular reactors (SMR) measuring 15 feet in diameter by 65 feet long, each generating 60 megawatts of electricity for a total of 720 megawatts, running 24/7 for its 60-year service life with a 95% capacity factor. Compare that to the 20-ish year service life of 12-13 megawatts of intermittent power with a roughly 40% capacity factor. Nuclear is far and away the most efficient power-generation invented so far. Add in the fact that uranium extraction from seawater, now demonstrated as feasible and cost-effective, could provide all the power needs of humans for about a BILLION years with no CO2 emissions, and combined with a fleet of fast-reactor plants that burn the waste of SMRs to produce more power and reduce waste to essentially nothing, nuclear is the most viable "green" power for now and the future. And SMR's won't be the eyesore that wind turbines and large coal, natural gas, or nuclear plants are today.
Matt C
Well that is a massive waste of bird killing machines that will make a nice pile of trash that someone will need to clean up someday. Can we please stop making more garbage that doesn't work. see Germany for how it worked out for them.
I agree with aksdad.
I'm a big fan of nuclear, just not the old school plants, that costs billions & decades to build. Semi-trailer sized reactors produced in a assembly line would be great. I also love nuclear fusion...but were always a decade away from that.
What a sight to see as a mega lift chopper puts these blades in place if it ever happens.
I don't get some of the comments. The three-blade horizontal-axis wind turbines (HAWT) built at scale have proven to be the most efficient turbines. 5 blade systems are less efficient but if you have data to the contrary supporting that a 5 blade system is the most efficient you should probably present official peer reviewed research though proper channels supporting your conclusion. To the person concerned with taking out airplanes: These are 853 feet high. If you are in an airplane and your altitude is below 900 feet I sure hope you are either taking off or landing. I have to assume nobody is planning to build these at the end of the runway. Outside of that if you do regularly enjoy flying airplanes below 900 feet without bothering to notice you are in a field of wind turbines it seems like you have a larger problem which shouldn't really be blamed on GM for improving the efficiency of wind power. To the folks talking Nuclear and offshore wind costs, please look at the "Lazard 2020 LCOE" report. Yes offshore wind is almost 2x the cost of on shore wind but it's still cheaper than Nuclear power and high costs for offshore wind is exactly what building a larger scale turbine is intended to help solve.
George Schulte
So , these turbines can power a house for two days with one spin? How do they store the energy for two days in one spin?
Bad analogy, isn’t it ! They can power a house for the time it takes for the duration of one spin ! Perhaps 10 seconds ?
Load More