1

Comparison between Wind Turbine Farms on a High Altitude versus a Wind Turbine Farm on a Lower
Altitude

Student’s Name

Institution Affiliation
 2

Wind Turbine Farms on a High Altitude versus Wind Turbine on a lower Altitude

Introduction

One of the most pressing issues confronting humanity today is the development of renewable energy
sources. On the one side, global energy consumption is expected to increase by 50% between 2005 and
2030, owing primarily to non–OECD country advancement. The challenges with the actual distribution of
energy output among the various sources, on the other hand, are clear and confirmed by several studies.
Fossil fuels (oil, gas, and coal) supply nearly 80% of worldwide electricity consumption (as described in,
amended to 2006), and they are delivered by a few number of producers with restricted reservoirs. The
cost of energy derived from fossil fuels is steadily rising due to rising demand, which is linked to the
emerging economies of the world's most populous countries. Furthermore, the detrimental consequences
of fossil-fuel-based electricity production on climate changes, as well as the detrimental consequences of
fossil energy on the ecosystem, are widely known and result in increased overhead expenses. The
utilization of an appropriate combination of different renewable energy sources is one of the major
elements in resolving these difficulties. Nevertheless, when compared to fossil energy, the real expenses
of such alternatives are not reasonable. An in-depth examination of the properties of many alternative
energy sources is beyond the scope of this study, thus only a few brief comments about wind energy are
offered here to better drive the investigation.

Wind power meets roughly 0.3 percent of worldwide energy consumption, with installed capacity
growing at a rate of around 27% per year on average in 2007. Scientific investigations have shown that by
utilizing 20% of the world's land locations classified as class 3 or higher (i.e. with an average wind speed
more than 6.9 m/s at 80 meters above the ground), the whole world's power required could be met.
Nevertheless, wind turbine technology, which is built on wind generators, which involve significant
underpinnings and big blades, as well as major investments, cannot harness such possibilities at attractive
pricing. A complete description of current wind technology is provided, with the caveat that no significant
advancements are predicted in this subject. Due to infrastructure constraints that have surpassed their
theoretical limits, wind turbines can only function at a maximum height of roughly 150 meters. Regarding
1.5 MW, 77–m diameter turbines, the current land utilization of wind farms is around 6 towers per km2.
The power density of 9 MW/km2 is approximately 200–300 percent smaller than that of big thermal
facilities. Furthermore, due to wind fluctuation, a wind farm may only produce a proportion of its voltage
rating (i.e. the amount for which the electrical project was undertaken, indicated as "capacity factor") on
an estimate based (CF). For "excellent" sites, this percentage is usually between 0.3 and 0.45. All of these
factors contribute to wind energy manufacturing costs being greater than those of energy sources. As a
result, a qualitative jump in this field is required to achieve cost competitiveness with actual fossil fuels,
eliminating necessity sustainable electricity production subsidies.

As a result, this article evaluates wind turbine farms at greater altitudes against wind turbine farms at
lower altitudes. The amount above sea level is measured in altitude, just like inclination. Areas that
ascend at least 2,400 meters (8,000 feet) into the environment are commonly referred to as "high-
altitude." Air pressure decreases as altitude increases. To put it another way, if the height displayed is
high, the air pressure is low. The cost of installation, depreciation and amortization, state-of-the-art, and
investment will all be factored into the evaluation. Other characteristics, including as the capacity factor,
velocity, and turbulence consequences, will be considered in this study's evaluation of multiple farms.

Methodology

Capacitor factor
 3

The capacity factor (CF) was computed and analyzed using logical information from wind turbine farms
at a greater height and output from wind energy farms at a lower altitude.

Operations

Net present value of a High Altitude versus Lower Altitude

Income or outlay of Discount rate of High

Year cash 8% Altitude
0 ($55,000) ($55,000)
1 $30,425 0.925926 $28,171.30
2 $30,425 0.857339 $26,084.54
3 $30,425 0.793832 $24,152.34
4 $30,425 0.73503 $22,363.29
5 $30,425 0.680583 $20,706.74
6 $30,425 0.63017 $19,172.92
7 $30,425 0.58349 $17,752.68
8 $30,425 0.540269 $16,437.68
Sum of NPV $119,841.49

Discount rate of Lower

Year Outflows of cash 8% Altitude
0 ($158,000) ($158,000)
1 $43,900 0.925926 $40,648.15
2 $43,900 0.857339 $37,637.18
3 $43,900 0.793832 $34,849.22
4 $43,900 0.73503 $32,267.82
5 $43,900 0.680583 $29,877.59
6 $43,900 0.63017 $27,664.46
7 $43,900 0.58349 $25,615.21
8 $43,900 0.540269 $23,717.81

Sum of NPV $94,277.45

 Net Present Value of High Altitude Wind Turbine = $ 119,841.49

 Net Present Value of Lower Altitude Wind Turbine = $ 94,277.45
 4

Result

The net present value of the High Altitude Wind Turbine is calculated to be $119,841.49,
whereas, for the net present value of the Lower Altitude Wind Turbine is computed to be $94,277.45.
Therefore, the High Altitude Wind Turbine of the higher net present value compared to new backhoes. As
such, this implies that we should use the High Altitude Wind Turbine as it generated most revenue in 8
years. The High Altitude Wind Turbine generated more profits for the company than the new backhoes.
Therefore, the firm should use High Altitude Wind Turbine. High Altitude Wind Turbine will manage to
increase its benefits in the future compared to lower Altitude Wind Turbine As such, the company should
ensure that it goes with investment that generates more revenue in future, which result to maximizing the
profits while minimizing the costs. Thus, the calculation of the net present value of the
investments/projects reveals that Shoals Corporation will benefit more if it continues current Old
backhoes.

Payback Period

Following is the payback period for the High Altitude Wind Turbine

Payback Period for the High Altitude

Wind Turbine
Cost of overhaul $55,000
Net annual cashflow $30,425
   
Payback Period 1.807723911

 Cost of overhaul = $ 55,000

 Net annual cashflow = $ 30,425
 So, High Altitude Wind Turbine = $ 55,000 / $ 30,425 = 1.81 years
Following is the payback period for the lower altitude wind turbine

Payback Period for the Low Altitude

Wind Turbine
Cost of overhaul $158,000
Net annual cashflow $43,900
   
Payback Period 3.599088838

 Cost of purchase = $ 200,000 - $ 42,000 = $ 158,000

 Net annual cashflow = $ 43,900
 So, Payback period for Low Altitude Wind Turbine = $ 158,000 / $ 43,900 = 3.60 years
Payback Period Discussion

Payback for Higher Altitude Wind Turbine is two times faster than the Payback for higher
Altitude Wind Turbine. As the payback period for the higher Altitude Wind Turbine is 3.60 years while
for the Lower Altitude Wind Turbine is 1.81 years. Therefore, this reveals that the company should use
higher Altitude Wind Turbine as it payback period is less compared the payback period of the Lower
 5

Altitude Wind Turbine. Based on the above payback period calculations Low Altitude Wind Turbine
should be retained and higher Altitude Wind Turbine is not required.

Profitability Index
Profitability index helps to measure the attractiveness of an investment. As such, the PI helps to
determine the investment being undertaken will be able to break even. Thus, it helps to determine if the
benefits of the projects outweigh the costs. Profitability index is computed by dividing the future cash
flows by the initial project cost. Therefore, for company we need to calculate the PI for both investments.
Profitability Index for Lower Altitude Wind Turbine:
Initial Investment = $90,000
NPV = $119,841.49

Profitability Index = (90,000+119,841.49)/90,000

=2.33
Profitability Index for Lower Altitude Wind Turbine
Initial Investment = $200,000
NPV = $94,277.45

Profitability Index = (94,277.45+200000)/200,000

=1.44
Both investments have profitability index that is greater than 1, which implies the investments benefits
outweighs the costs. However, Lower Altitude Wind Turbine investment has PI of 2.33, whereas, higher
Altitude Wind Turbine has PI of 1.44, which implies that Old backhoes is more attractive investments of
two and it has more benefits, that is, profit.
Intangible factors that may influence the decision include
The higher Altitude Wind Turbine’s net present value is calculated to be $119,841.49, whereas
the Lower Altitude Wind Turbine net present value is calculated to be $94,277.45. As a result, higher
Altitude Wind Turbine has a higher net present value than higher Altitude Wind Turbine. As a result, the
company will make more profit with using the lower Altitude Wind Turbine than with the higher Altitude
Wind Turbine’s. As a result, the company should use old backhoes. As well, payback period for the
higher Altitude Wind Turbine is 3.60 years while for the Lower Altitude Wind Turbine is 1.81 years.
Therefore, this reveals that the company should use Lower Altitude Wind Turbine as it payback period is
less compared the payback period of the higher Altitude Wind Turbine (Ardalan, 2012).

Recommendation

Wind Turbine Farms on a High Altitude is better than a Wind Turbine Farm on a Lower. Thus, we
recommend use of KiteGen technology in higher altitude to generate energy because it offers more
benefits. The KiteGen project's main goal is to gather high–altitude wind energy with the least amount of
effort in regards of turbine construction, expense, and land use. The uppermost 20% of the blade tip
generates 80 percent of the power production in genuine wind turbines. The fundamental reason for this is
that the blade tangential speed (and hence the efficient wind speed) is greater towards the outermost
layers of the edge, and renewable energy develops with the square of the functional air velocity. As a
result, neither the superstructure nor the interior half of the blades contribute greatly to power production.
However, the architecture of a wind tower defines the majority of its cost and limits the height to which it
may be built. To make sense of KiteGen, consider removing all of a wind tower's clunky configuration
and keeping only the outermost layer of the propellers, resulting in a far more lighter kite which can fly
fast in headwind circumstances (see Fig. 1), connected in series by multiple body cables with propulsion
resistance 8–10 times greater than steel beams of the very same poundage. The connections are wound
 6

around two drums and connected to two motor motors that can function as generating or actuators. By
pushing the connections in separate directions, a signal conditioning controller to control the kite's
trajectory (see Fig. 2).The airfoil velocity and attitude, energy density, cabling force and rate, and wind
velocity are all fabricated and measured utilizing on–board cordless equipment (GPS, electromagnetic,
and accelerometer sensors) as well as surface actuators. Thus, in KiteGen generation, the rotor and tower
of current wind power generation are substituted by the kite and its connections, resulting in a portable
generator that is significantly lighter and less expensive. The height of the rotors and structure in a 2 MW
wind generator, for illustration, is normally around 250 tons. A kite generator with much the same rated
capacity can be made with a 500–m2 kite and 1000–m long lines, with an overall weight of only around 2
tons, as shown below.

The Kite Steering Unit (KSU), which consists of the electrical machines, rotors, and all of the equipment
required to operate a single kite, is the heart of the KiteGen technology. The KSU can be used to generate
electricity in a range of ways; thus far, two substances have been researched: the KG–yoyo and the KG–
 7

carousel arrangements. In its present format, the KSU has also been used to drive an automobile along
one circular rail course, producing electricity via extra portable generators attached to the tyres. For
upcoming projects, the choice among both KG–yoyo and KG–carousel combinations will be based on
technical and financial aspects such as infrastructure costs, engendered conversion efficiency in
associated with land occupation, and consistency characteristics.

The dependence of the maximum power production on the kite area and effectiveness, the mean cable
length over the cycling, and wind direction has also been investigated using mathematical simulations. If
not otherwise indicated, a kite with the parameters listed in Table I was used in the computations. Note
that the wire length has been positioned in all simulations in compliance with the adhesion pressure
generated by the kite, which varies depending on the attribute values evaluated.

Discussion and Conclusions

The preceding displayed data mostly highlights the variability in environmental assets, from annual to
everyday uncertainty. The wind turbine at higher altitudes averages a CF of 0.32 compared to the lower
altitude wind turbines CF of 0.24, which is within the expected range for wind turbines. The CF trend is
nearly the same, with minor deviations due to natural changes. However, when compared to both
altitudes, the CF at the higher altitude has a significantly higher CF than the lower altitude wind turbine
farms. This atypically high power generation could be linked to the wind turbine farm at a higher altitude.

According to the analysis, the ideal option for wind turbines is wind turbines at a higher altitude, as this
corresponds to higher energy generation as well as lower costs. There are circumstances for circulation
and metabolically driven winds because the sun is higher and lengthier during this time (due to the lack of
clouds). This implies that when the wind speed exceeds 12 m/s, a 1.5 MW wind turbine generates 1.5
MW of power, and when the wind direction exceeds 16 m/s, a 3 MW wind farm generates 3 MW of
power. In this scenario, however, 3 MW wind generators produce more energy with a little lower CF than
1.5 MW windmills.
 8

The yearly and monthly CF values illustrate the region's weather volatility; however, the substantial
fluctuation within the shown periods (spring and Oct) could be attributable to continental flow. Moisture
movement can cause low-level jets (LLJ), which generate high wind speeds at elevations of over 1000
meters in higher altitude conditions. This LLJ is around 1000 meters above sea level and flows before
changing direction to the south. There is a real correlation between weather volatility and the energy
generated in wind farms (2900 m a.s.l.) through a conduit, which may generate the high wind speed in the
wind farm. Eventually, some researchers discovered a four-day incidence of LLJ in the area, which could
account for the variation in temperature.
 9

References

Canale, M., Fagiano, L., & Milanese, M. (2009). High altitude wind energy generation using
controlled power kites. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 18(2), 279-
293.
Song, D., Liu, J., Yang, J., Su, M., Yang, S., Yang, X., & Joo, Y. H. (2019). Multi-objective
energy-cost design optimization for the variable-speed wind turbine at high-altitude
sites. Energy conversion and management, 196, 513-524.
Roberts, B. W., Shepard, D. H., Caldeira, K., Cannon, M. E., Eccles, D. G., Grenier, A. J., &
Freidin, J. F. (2007). Harnessing high-altitude wind power. IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, 22(1), 136-144.
Song, D., Liu, J., Yang, J., Su, M., Wang, Y., Yang, X., ... & Joo, Y. H. (2020). Optimal design
of wind turbines on high-altitude sites based on improved Yin-Yang pair
optimization. Energy, 193, 116794.
Barber, S., Wang, Y., Jafari, S., Chokani, N., & Abhari, R. S. (2011). The impact of ice
formation on wind turbine performance and aerodynamics.
Van den Berg, G. P. (2008). Wind turbine power and sound in relation to atmospheric
stability. Wind Energy: An International Journal for Progress and Applications in Wind
Power Conversion Technology, 11(2), 151-169.
Fagiano, L., Milanese, M., & Piga, D. (2009). High-altitude wind power generation. IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion, 25(1), 168-180.
Lee, J. T., Kim, H. G., Kang, Y. H., & Kim, J. Y. (2019). Determining the optimized hub height
of wind turbine using the wind resource map of South Korea. Energies, 12(15), 2949.
Ward, A., & Jorba, J. (2013). Harmonic buffeting in a high-altitude ridge-mounted triblade
Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics, 121, 106-115.