Your article ‘Silent Revolution’ (Insight, 21 May) came up with a rare aesthetically pleasing, silent wind turbine design.
One open question to the architects, however. Could not a sixth turbine be fitted in at the base of the triangle to maximise output from each structure — especially at open sites? Presumably also, the structure could be used to house other devices such as wireless antennas.
The success of the idea will depend on minimising installation costs and inter-connecting civil work. The output figures quoted suggest the average power will total about 40MW and 6,650 is an awful lot of structures for that.
Since, uniquely, the turbines would be among people and road traffic, testing will have to prove that, in cold conditions (calm or windy) ice deposits from mist, drizzle, snow etc will not build up on the structures.
Testing will also have to ensure the turbines do not oscillate in strong parallel winds, and each structure will have to contain its own integral maintenance access.
P H Field
St Albans, Herts
I disagree with David Marks’ comment that the Beacon is an elegant design within a city landscape. It is, however, an elegant substitute for an electricity pylon, of which there must be thousands across the countryside, in windy locations and away from residential areas.
This appears to be a promising solution for addressing the power losses across the grid and may, when operating under optimum conditions, provide a surplus. Being located within the existing distribution network, costs are minimised and such a scheme is unlikely to raise comment, since existing structures would be replaced by something visually similar.
Your article ‘Silent Revolution’ came up with a rare aesthetically pleasing, silent wind turbine design.