Short note on just one point: 

Pierre writes:  "redefine kite as AWES"

encloses a notion that may not be what the case is. 

It may be the case that one looks at kite and finds that kite fulfills "airborne wind energy system" and thus accepts kite as a member of airborne wind energy systems.  Such process of recognition might not be "redefining" but just seeing that something qualifies for a defined class.    The kite flying has always been a system that interacts with the wind; from that interaction the wind is slowed, and changed while the parts of the kite system are changed in different ways; both the wind and the kite system change upon the interactions. The kite system gets pushed around, gets deformed, experiences compression and tension because of the interaction. The wind in the interaction changes course, slows, and experiences new eddies. There is a give and take occurring between the kite system and the wind. The kite is a changer of the wind; the wind is a changer of the kite system. The exchange follows action-reaction laws. There is a final equality occurring in the exchange; the enclosing system remains with the same energy total throughout the exchange process. As the kite is changed by the interaction, one can find that the kite's parts interact with each other in the new changed ways and further changes can be notice as a result the interactions; some radiation occurs in the form of exchanges of electrons, some electromagnetic radiation occurs going out from the kite parts to the large space where the wind is dancing, some mechanical oscillations occur in the kite parts that set up oscillations in the air of the wind forming sounds, some mechanical oscillations occur that set up waves in the kite system parts including through the tether set and resistive anchor set which further vibrates the soil of earth. All such things and more occur because of the interaction of the kite with the wind; the wind is forever altered and the kite system is forever altered because of the interaction between the two dissimilar objects (wind and kite). The wind is converted to a new arrangement while the kite is converted to a new arrangement. The wind and the kite are somehow responsible for the new converted states they find themselves in because of the interaction. The energy environment of the wind gets altered and the energy environment in the kite system get altered. Resultants occur in the wind and the kite system instantaneously and with averages. The wind is a kite converter; the kite is a wind converter; they convert each other when they interact. One of the results of the interaction is that the kite often stays with potential energy at some altitude; another resultant in the kite is a formation of pockets of potential energy in the form of stressed arrangements; another resultant in the kite is a formation of waves that travel in the material of the kite system to all of its parts and onward to things that the kite system contacts (air, soil perhaps, hands perhaps).  While the interactions are occurring one may trace the changes ... a series of conversions of energy from one sort to another both in the wind and the kite parts and adjacent environment and even in remote "at a distance" environment (in the case of the electromagnetic radiation coming off the changing excited kite system. It seems common to address the happenings as "kite capturing energy from the wind's motion bottled up in the momentum mostly of the wind, that is the mass of the air with the accelerations of the molecules of the air. Another phrase used for the the changes in the kite parts is "converts some of the wind's energy" to various sorts of energies in the kite-system parts. 

     Depending on the structure of the kite system, the kite system will handle changes in idiosyncratic ways; one simple system made different from another simple kite system will handle the changes occurring from interacting with the wind's impacts and rubs different than the other simple kite system; one kite system will react to form more electromagnetic radiation than the other; one of the two sample simple kite systems will form waves down its tether with a signature distinct from the other different simple kite system; that is the differences of the two simple kite systems will end up forming a distinct signature of resultants, waves, radiance, frequencies of waves. With proper sensors one may identify kite systems; there will be a kind of "fingerprint" for each of the two simple kite systems.  Each flying kite will be converting energy from one form to another as equilibrium is ever sought by the system. Dampening structures interior of the kite system will ever play while the flying is occurring and thus while the exchanges are made with the wind; Some of the changes will funnel to stabilities and some to instabilities; sometimes catastrophic singularities will be approached in some of the parts of the kite system as parts move and work and strain and change because of the works going on. The flying kite is a essentially a collection of sub-parts that act as generators of changed energy formats; and globally the net result of a simple kite is that it generates waves and vibrations and moments that alter the air and soil and even remote objects; that is, the simple flying kite is both a converter system and a generator system.  

     Such above shows a seed AWES in the simple flying kite system.  Many people in K3 AWE community are aiming to construct non-simple kite systems in order to increase the amount of radiance that comes out of a kite system; for example, when a kite system has parts that rotate a conductive coil around proximate magnets, then those parts damp the feeding mechanical energy by working the magnetic field which forms a resultant movement of electrons in the coil which when connected correctly will effect flows to distant loads. 

Many people are putting parts into kite systems so that resultants are not damped by magnetic fields but damped by the friction and drag of a ship's hull or damped by the lifting of masses to altitude or damped by gross motion of parts of the kite system to scare birds or make music or grind grain; various formats of the resistive subassembly of a kite system play to damp mechanical  motion of parts of the kite system.

On another point brought up recently by Pierre about "stakeholders":  A person or company dedicated to selling a toy kite is selling an instance of an AWES, but not the type of AWES that is in focus by an electrical industrialist. Those buying and using the toy kite (a humble AWES) may or may not ever pointedly care about what the heavy industrialist is doing; however, it is conceivable that the toy-kite user might become aware and supportive of the heavy-industrial use of kites that interest the heavy industrialist operating with specialized kite systems. And in reverse, a growth in heavy-industry AWES just might tend to alter the toy-kite environment in many ways.  Advanced AWES workers sometimes have had influencing backgrounds from their having had experiences with toy AWES (kite systems). The stakeholder page holds reach to over a 1000 people now, mostly those who have some stake in the heavier-industrial end of AWES environment. Easily the page could give valid nod to the non-heavy-industry kite sector as stakeholders, but with a nod that would respect different perspectives, different immediate interests, and different perspectives. The page has a heavy prejudice toward the heavy industry sector of AWE for traction, substantial fuel-saving applications, and electrical production with eye to substantial supply of energy for tertiary parties to consume. By the synergy of Pierre's questioning, some nod on that page will be given to the other sectors of AWE that have less heavy and more restricted interests; the main focus will remain the main focus: heavier wins that more rapidly diminish the use of fossil fuels.  The main orientation of the page on AWE stakeholders regards people who are aiming to play in the kite sector that will supply solutions that are aside of the popular toy and sport market; there will be overlaps and cross-teachings as time unfolds. There will one day be "kite festivals" that have new events influenced by the heavy industrial sector of kite energy. 

Note: we have some stakeholders without hyperlinks yet; anyone may supply me with links; thanks. 

Some people who have a stake in AWE are no longer participating. On balance, there is very strong evidence that very many people belonging on the page are missing; we will not be putting the millions who fly toy AWES of conventional task solving (rest, park recreation, simple kiteboarding, pleasant visual art safisfying, etc.)  Please watch for users, designers, engineers, inventors, supports, investors who are playing parts in having kite systems solve practical challenges; I want to recognize especially persons who are  helping to bring forward solutions that will tend to robustly advance the quality of life on earth by use of kite systems.   Thanks for sending in data about participants. 

Lift, 

 ~ JoeF

Via the synergy of PierreB and DaveS, the following headline is installed on the stakeholder page: 

===============

AWE Stakeholders who have directly participated in rapid AWES development (RAD) (kite-energy systems that tend to solve substantial practical needs):

===================

[All text in files I edit are open for community influence; thanks for any critique and helpful inputs!]

~ JoeF

DaveS,

"...the Truth; that every kite is a true system to convert wind energy into flight." Wrong definition.

I take again the following pleonasm used by JoeF, that to explain you what is a conversion of energy: to convert one form of energy to another form of energy." to convert wind energy into flight" is not correct, "flight" being not an "energy". So a kite uses wind energy to fly, not to convert it; an AWES converts the wind energy, and sometimes uses wind energy to stay aloft if said AWES is a system integrated a kite, sometimes no if said AWES is an aerostat.

On the form I observe JoeF and you must much write to try to justify another (wrong) sense of the word "kite".

For the main to wrongly redefine kite as AWES sounds like a confession of failure of energy production by kites.

PierreB

I put again my message with some corrections and adds. 

"...the Truth; that every kite is a true system to convert wind energy into flight." False definition.

 I take again the following pleonasm used by JoeF, that to explain you what is a conversion of energy: to convert one form of energy to another form of energy.What you write as "...to convert wind energy into flight" is not correct, "flight" being not an "energy" by itself, not more another form of energy, or if you prefer you can not use units of energy to qualify "flight"; so there is no conversion of wind energy,only use of wind energy as flying. So a kite uses wind energy to fly, does not convert it; an AWES converts wind energy, and sometimes uses wind energy to stay aloft if said AWES is a system integrating a kite under all forms, sometimes does not use wind energy to stay aloft if said AWES is a system integrating an aerostat , sometimes both if said AWES is a system integrating both kite and aerostat.   

On the form I observe JoeF and you must much write to try to justify another (wrong) sense of the word "kite".

For the main to wrongly redefine kite as AWES sounds like a confession of failure of energy production by Mothra.

For me this subject is closed: I will not take account of future messages trying to justify a false definition by false arguments. 

Please try us to make a working AWES rather than a new false definition of kite as AWES.

PierreB

A link among others to help understanding of energy conversion:energy conversion (technology) -- Encyclopedia Britannica .  From the text: "energy conversion, the transformation of energy from forms provided by nature to forms that can be used by humans."

A wind turbine converts wind energy into electrical energy or another energy like pumping.The same for an AWES. A kite uses wind energy to stay aloft, but does not convert wind energy, staying aloft being not a form or another form of energy, and yet less a form of energy that can be used by humans. Make us AWES rather than false definitions of kite as AWES. I hope this subject is now clear for you;for me it is closed.

Lift 

PierreB

DaveS,

By writing "So what exactly converts the wind energy into flight energy, if not the kite by itself?" you make a ridiculous confusion. You add the word "energy" beside the word "flight", hoping its is enough. "flight energy" is the wind energy used to fly, not a form of energy converted from wind energy. See my precedent post with the link energy conversion (technology) -- Encyclopedia Britannica I put again. Please read the following passage:"energy conversion, the transformation of energy from forms provided by nature to forms that can be used by humans." .Now I stop to reply to future false assertions. The problem is not to falsely redefinite energy, but producing it.

PierreB

Pierre, 

        Have a simple kite be observed at 100 m altitude; The wing of that kite system has P1 amount of potential energy in its global wing-mass scene. At the concerned moment the wind is say 5 m/s. Now some moments later the wind picks up to 6 m/s and we observe the wing mass of the kite system say at 118 m altitude. One analysis of the situation could be is that wind kinetic energy got converted to potential energy to make the difference from the 100 m potential energy position to the 118 m altitude potential energy position. The interaction of the kite and the wind resulted in wind kinetic energy converted to some potential energy. Cut the string of the kite system and let the kite system use it 118 m worth of potential energy to glide about the sky for some time until that potential energy gets used up and we find the wing sitting in a tree or on the ground. A common speak is to say that the kite system captured some of the wind's kinetic energy and converter such to potential energy to be used at some later time.   How would you describe the change of kinetic energy to potential energy in this scenario?       From such, I have understood the kite system to be a converter of energy via the interaction. Not spoken yet about in this circumstance is that there was also a conversion of wind kinetic energy into some kinetic energy of the wing and tether of the simple kite as the masses of the kite system moved from being at one position up to another position.   Also, during the movement and interaction, the structural parts of the kite system were active in stresses with resultant strains which inescapably produce electronic motion and conversions of potential and kinetic energy within the kite system parts; such further has the kite be a converter of energy and also a generator of energy in various formats, which energy gets to do work moments later after formation or much later when further changes occur tripped by further historical stresses of the system.   For such reasons, it seems easy to know the flying kite as an airborne wind energy system. In non-simple kite systems where the parts in the system are structured to have designed rotations, one may hold magnets and coils to achieve further emphatic channeled conversions within the kite system; and by such careful refined design of some kite systems, the radiance givings by the kite system can be altered. In some kite systems the channeling to specific kinds of radiance from the kite system is paid by having less potential energy in the wing set in order to have more energy for other energy formats, say to rotate a coil-holding shaft near some magnets when electricity radiance is more wanted from the kite system.   I await to read how you handle the change to potential energy at the start of this paragraph.     

Thanks for the stresses and strains of conversation on these welcome matters, as one of the resultants of such is the seeing how very strongly the simple kite system is an emphatic converter, generator, worker, user, holder,and  channel. Such character portends wonderful things that can happen when refined structures are integrated in a more complex kite system.  Thanks, Simple Kite, for being an airborne wind energy system; your cousins in Complex Kite Family will hold members that emphasize one energy radiance over other energy radiance in order to perform works to solve certain specified practical tasks. The Era K3 will have some advanced AWES performing spectacular works. 

Best, 

~ JoeF

Pierre, you may have closed off from further exploration  of "kite as AWES", but know well that your are welcome to revisit the topic at any time.   I am thankful greatly for your exploration of the matter, as it is for some now more clear than ever that "kite in dynamic flight is an AWES" even if you have yet to compose self text to express such statement. The countering effort has given positive exercise and will continue to urge careful exploration of energy conversions and generations that occur in physical material dynamical bodies in subsystems as well as in the interaction with adjacent systems.  Chime in at any time to address the several unaddressed points that have surfaced so far in the conversation.  The tease to fine tune logic in the face of good physics is evident to me when I step back and weigh the recent conversation; some clear summaries are invited about how a simple kite a energy converter, an energy generator, an energy user, a worker, an energy holder, an energy channel, an energy radiator, an energy sponge, an energy gifter, etc. Various parts of this are clear to some people and not clear to other people, and so there is plenty of careful work to be done.  And I thank you for being an important valuable part of this process; the resultants from the synergy are helping to move AWE forward in a good way. 

Best, 

~ JoeF

Let there be a wind (motion of air relative to the fixed reference of earth surface) and let a simple kite interact with that wind with the result of have the wing of the simple kite rise from 100 m to 300 m. Now in the game here, let calm for the wind occur quickly; even let us take all air molecules out of the scene by some magic and do such subtraction extremely quickly, perhaps instantaneously.   Let the simple kite have its 300 m position though.  What happens? In the vacuum posed the wing and tether of the simple kite will rush down with the acceleration due to gravity and without resistance by air as we pose having taken away the molecules of the air leaving calm vacuum. The impact of the wing and tether with the ground will result in smashed kite parts and smashed dented soil part. Work will have been done at the impact site. The work done was done by the use of the energy (potential energy) that was held by the kite system. The impact damage will be a certain size depending on the amount of potential energy that the kite system held when it was at 300 m.   Notice that the magnitude of the impact damages to kite and soil would have been less had the kite fallen from a 100 m position.   Where did that (300 m - 100 m)= 200 m position change come from? Where did that increased potential energy come from? We look closely and find that during the change from 100 m to 300 m the wind gave up some of its kinetic energy and such energy went someplace; in the event we find that the kite system had a change in the interaction where the kite system suddenly had more potential energy than it had before the interaction and also some more kinetic energy. Neglecting frictional heat and less noticed electromagnetic energy events of the interaction while we focus on the potential energy and kite's kinetic energy matters, we find a generally equal situation where energy was neither created or destroyed in the interaction episode; but we notice emphatically that the exchange resulted in energy of kinetic sort in wind was changed to potential energy sort in kite system.  Some humans, let's say wanted a certain soil patch dented and let the kite system used its new found extra potential energy to do work to smash that patch of soil.     This story finds the simple kite as a player in interactions sufficiently to name the simple kite as a converter and generator that does its roles while airborne; and thus Simple Kite is generally an airborne wind energy conversion system and also an airborne wind energy generator system and also an airborne wind energy user and also an airborne wind energy channel. 

Best, 

~ JoeF

Joe,

The priority is to conceive an economically viable AWES (kite/aerostat and conversion system linked or integrated; now this precision can become needed within AWEforum) to producing electricity, pumping water, producing storage as hydrogen or battery or compressed air or hydraulic accumulator. In a way it is good you collect all possible data and try to push the limits of definitions, but it is also good to concretize some realization by limiting the choice of possibilities according to the returns of global experiences.

Lift,

PierreB  

Now you are cooking aware stew, DougS. Good on you! Such digested will allow creative inroads to new opportunities!

Next is to wisely select among options to effect the world in which you wish to live. 

Best, 

 ~ JoeF

Agreed. Lets design, build, test, analyze, report, and then get back designing better, building again, testing again, analyzing again, reporting again ... and do comparative testing, until we get robust service for tasks from kytoon kite systems and non-kytoon kite systems.  The text adventures have a place and frequently clue to novel branches of exploration. "Reporting" to one another and the world will use text, images, and hardware; reporting will include meter readings that report some parameter (we had better well know the definition of metered parameters and how to interpret meter readings!).  The main thing is urged by you; let's get to it! Yet, let's not throw away the value of thought expressed in text, as such is also a tool of the industrial and service effort.  Improvement on all fronts is beckoning those who would serve to advance AWE; there is room for all kinds of players; may we work out a very effective way to make progress.  Rod Read is emphasizing collaboration and cooperation on AWE-related tasks via organized task tracking; we hope to hear more from him; such seems like it would forward your goals, Pierre.   Best to you and your works!

Lift, 

~ JoeF

DougS, the going on is to find a mix that better satisfies certain criteria.

Some of us are wanting to grow a mix of solutions that results in cleaner air for humans and animals to live in. So, the work for kite systems and AWE is not done until AWE does its best to help form a satisfying mix. Take your rest, if you wish. But you are invited to come back and help form a different package of solutions for different net results. 

Lift, 

~ JoeF

Excellent, you strive for new futures with new mixes that seem to better satisfy your picture of the world!

Maybe you will help find the path to having AWES provide the energy for those mutually-aware road cars. 

You seem to have the habits that could contribute strongly to such a goal. 

Cheers, 

~ JoeF

DaveS,

AWES is a combination of both wind energy and tethered aviation. Where is wind energy in your link? For last time I am going to try to make you understand that a kite does not convert energy by itself. For that I take a reverse sample:a wind turbine (Wind turbine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) of which you remove the generator converts no more energy, although the propeller turns under the influence of the wind. And a kite taken alone has a stage less regarding energy conversion.

According to your definition Mothra is finished: it is OK. But according to your definition my shoes do also convert energy, as well as a chair, as well as a table, as well as all you want by arguing.

PierreB

DaveS,

"Thank you for bravely debating against AWE economic or engineering viability." About a kite not being an AWES, not directly about AWE viability.Please be more precise instead making arguments of low level.

"It seems that Pro-AWE has won the Great AWE Debate, if only by sheer numbers of experts and a superior quantity and quality of evidence." Congratulations! Great arguments!

PierreB 

Massaging your offered supposed counterexample one will find that there is a non-noticing of energy conversion still occurring and in several ways.    You propose taking a look at a towered conventional wind turbine arrangement and subtracting the integrated part called electric generator. You are correct in noticing that the amount electrical radiance from the new deleted-part arrangement provides less electrical energy for the receiving grid. No problem there. But they an overstep is stated: converts no more energy" which is not true. The subtract-stated-arrangement still converts energy as evident in many ways: the blades still turn and enter often into turning too fast with the absence of the damping effect of the electrical generator part subtracted; such converted energy in such circumstance too frequently end in overspeed and destructive collapse of the blades and sometimes the tower. The converted energy goes someplace; sometimes to dent the tower and dent the soil and dent humans. More: the blades are generating energy conversion in its parts during the dynamic run; the more energy the blades take from the wind into the blades, the more such interior conversions and generations occur doing work or being stored in strain potential energy. Sound is generated and sent out, partly annoying and partly useful to wind-farm management as the sound may alert to the overspeed conditions permitted by subtracting the damping electrical generator.   The whole system was refined to manage energies to give high focus to electrical radiance to the anchor set and connected grid loads; but when the subtraction of that damping electrical generator occurs, then the various energy flows still occur and radiance of  energy still occurs, some considered wasted and some considered useful to humans. So, the proposed example does not counter as wished.  The reduced system is still a system that convert energy in many ways and radiates energy in many ways, even thous the focused way was subtracted. Energy conservation law rules. 

Best, 

Lift, 

~ JoeF

JoeF,DaveS,

I put again the link and the citation  energy conversion (technology) -- Encyclopedia Britannica :"energy conversion, the transformation of energy from forms provided by nature to forms that can be used by humans."  According to the definition it is obvious both a simple kite and a wind turbine of which the generator is removed do not convert wind energy.

PierreB

Simple kite has been shown to convert and radiate energies used by humans. 

Conventional tower three-blade turbine without the part electrical generator has been shown to convert and radiate energies used by humans. 

Such showing counters the conclusion just stated.

Indeed, emphatically the evidence shows that the two types of object systems do convert wind energy. 

Best, 

~ JoeF

"Conventional tower three-blade turbine without the part electrical generator has been shown to convert and radiate energies used by humans. " No! A conversion system must be added, as generator or another.A conventional tower three-blade turbine without conversion system does not convert wind energy.

PierreB

DaveS,

For you AWE seems to be only a mean to try to win about arguing.

From Wind power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia : "Wind power is the conversion of wind energy into a useful form of energy, such as using wind turbines to make electrical power, windmills for mechanical power, windpumps for water pumping or drainage, or sails to propel ships." Correspondences: AWES (from which airborne wind turbines) for "wind turbines", kites for sails, actually kitesurf for ships...

"Your latest assertion, that "kites are not AWES" seems intended to argue that economically viable kite-sports, etc., are not AWES either. Both points are rebutted, the second as blocking logic." You read badly my posts. Kite-sports like kitesurf are AWES, the kite being not a simple kite (the set with kite, board and handles integrating the conversion system), and a useful form of energy being converted as travel. I hope you have understood by writing "AWE is not viable economically" I refered and I refer _since I do not deny this assertion with their arguments _ in electrical power, on the same basis as almost all
existing prototypes. I precise again it is not impossible AWE for electrical power becomes economically viable if the good way exists and if it is found. 

PierreB

DaveS,

DaveS,

"Your latest assertion, that "kites are not AWES" seems intended to argue that economically viable kite-sports, etc., are not AWES either. Both points are rebutted, the second as blocking logic."  False argument containing both an error in logic and a process of intention:there is no blocking logic by asserting both "AWE is not economically viable " and "kites are not AWES", while considering economically viable kite-sports are not AWES, on the contrary!

But instead of quibbling I prefer arguing on the real aspects and perspectives about AWE like on my precedent post to assert kite-sports are AWES since wind energy is converted into a usefull form of energy as travel and since they are not simple kites but they integrate the conversion system as board, handle, and also the user.However I do not believe this form of AWES is the main target on the forum: discussions and projects are not about kite-sports, even not about towing ships (SkySails realizes it) but in first about making electrical production into a not yet realized viable way: you write about Makani, TuDelft, Magenn, kiteGen, Enerkite, NTS, Windlift, Altaero,Ampyx ...(all making prototypes for electrical production), not about manufacturers of kitesurf ; in second about other forms of conversion for pumping water,storage... I hope you have understood by writing "AWE is not viable economically" I refered and I refer _since I do not deny this assertion with their arguments _ in electrical power, on the same basis as almost all existing prototypes. I precise again it is not impossible AWE for electrical power becomes economically viable if the good way exists and if it is found. 

PierreB   

PierreB, 

      You presented a scenario of conventional wind turbine which I assumed meant that there is in that system an advanced block of material COTS "electrical generator" that in example was to be removed from the tower while leaving rotating blades with the hub for rotation.  I think we are then looking at the same object left after the subtraction. What is left on the tower is a tri-blade and a rotating hub without that big block COTS generator to damp the energy residing in the rotating blades.   Are we seeing that much together the same?

DaveS,

Please read again the definition of Britannica you agree:"energy conversion, the transformation of energy from forms provided by nature to forms that can be used by humans." ,that before writing "Such a turbine is still a WECS, even without any added conversion stage.It DOES convert wind energy into Lift Energy*". By mentioning "* Miles Loyd's "Lift Power" over time equals Lift Energy." , you aggravate your incomprehension: indeed Lift Energy is absolutely useless in the case of a conventional tower three-blades turbine, "Lift Energy" of such a turbine not being able to be used by humans.

So I will stop arguing against so much nonsense on all your messages.

PierreB 

"Your latest assertion, that "kites are not AWES" seems intended to argue that economically viable kite-sports, etc., are not AWES either. Both points are rebutted, the second as blocking logic."  False argument containing both an error in logic and a process of intention:there is no blocking logic by asserting both "AWE is not economically viable " and "kites are not AWES", while considering economically viable kite-sports are not AWES, on the contrary!

But instead of quibbling I prefer arguing on the real aspects and perspectives about AWE like on my precedent post to assert kite-sports are AWES since wind energy is converted into a usefull form of energy as travel and since they are not simple kites but they integrate the conversion system as board, handle, and also the user.However I do not believe this form of AWES is the main target on the forum: discussions and projects are not about kite-sports, even not about towing ships (SkySails realizes it) but in first about making electrical production into a not yet realized viable way: you write about Makani, TuDelft, Magenn, kiteGen, Enerkite, NTS, Windlift, Altaero,Ampyx ...(all making prototypes for electrical production), not about manufacturers of kitesurf ; in second about other forms of conversion for pumping water,storage... I hope you have understood by writing "AWE is not viable economically" I refered and I refer _since I do not deny this assertion with their arguments _ in electrical power, on the same basis as almost all existing prototypes. I precise again it is not impossible AWE for electrical power becomes economically viable if the good way exists and if it is found. 

PierreB   

Pierre, that article is locked; the error in its first statement is difficult to correct without being a seasoned editor. You have picked up that false statement and are using it.  Wind power as a NAME FOR A GENERAL ACTIVITY is one thing. But mechanically wind power is a rate of doing work, not a conversion. Just a rate. 

I pointed the error to a seasoned editor and I do not know if he will address the error or not.  

~ JoeF

Joe,

From wind power (energy) -- Encyclopedia Britannica:"wind power, form of energy conversion in which turbines convert the kinetic energy of wind into mechanical or electrical energy that can be used for power."From Wind power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :"Wind power is the conversion of wind energy into a useful form of energy, such as using wind turbines to make electrical power, windmills for mechanical power" From yourself:"...But mechanically wind power is a rate of doing work, not a conversion. Just a rate."

Who is right? Both Encyclopedia Britannnica and Wikipedia or yourself

PierreB

Britannica makes errors. Wikipedia has lots of errors. Since power is a rate and not an energy, then Britannica it seems and Wikipedia opening sentence are not reflecting the physics correctly. They both seem to want to talk about wind power as a general activity, but they both stumble as they mix up what is energy and what is power; the two are not equivalent. Energy is the ability to do work.  Power is the rate that the work is done. Converting energy to another form of energy gives energy, not power, but an ability to do work.  When one does the work slow or fast then one is dealing with power. 

~ JoeF

I agree with both Britannica's and Wikipedia's definitions. Indeed the term of energy refers in the resource  ;then the term of power refers in the rated converted resource.

PierreB  

The resources have some correctness, but the opening sentences of the articles have errors. 

Whenever a sentence has a confusion of energy with power, an error is embedded. 

When energy is converted, then the resultant is energy.   How fast the conversion is accomplished is not energy. 

When work is done per time, then power is happening

DaveS,

"Let Barnard's blog be the "Forum" where you do not have to bother with kite-sports and other kite-knowledge troves."

As usually a deformation of my words.

PierreB

DaveS, JoeF,

Some corrections on my precedent post.

"Thank you if you do rest your thesis: that kites are not AWES, because the flight energy is useless (abusing Britannica)." Deformation of my words as usual.

JoeF you think the definitions of both Britannica and Wikipedia about wind energy as conversion system contain errors, I no, and DaveS you don't understand them or you do not want understand them. When you counter one of my arguments by justifying FAA's position, then I detail FAA's position by citing the text, FAA becomes "poor".

I agree with FAA's actual position, and definitions of Britannica and Wikipedia.  

By wanting to redefine every thing about AWE, you break the common good sense in wind energy. Here is a French proverb: "Do not put the cart before the horse".Making a useful AWES before redefining.It is not only a problem of words, it is also a problem of choice in AWE. DaveS I understand by mentioning all days Mothra as Mega-Scale AWES without even beginning to describe how the generator/conversion system works (without even speaking about a prototype), your better choice is redefining AWE as an useless form of energy to be in agreement with your project.

PierreB