Popular Science looks inside GE new 4MW turbine.

[Statistical]

Manufacturers worldwide are experimenting with two techniques: ever-longer blades to harness more gusts, and simplified drivetrains (including new generators) that slash the need for costly repairs at sea. GE’s upcoming machine, slated to go online in 2012, will combine both into one package.

GE created lightweight 176-foot blades—about 40 percent longer than the average—with a more aerodynamic shape. The blades will attach to a drivetrain that does away with many of the moving parts, including the gearbox, that are prone to breakage and energy loss. A direct-drive mechanism replaces gears, and permanent magnets replace the electromagnets that require starter brushes, coils and power from the grid every time they fire up. The blades are now being tested in the Netherlands, and the drivetrain in Norway. Combining the two should result in a turbine that captures 25 percent more wind power than conventional models, so it can operate more often at its full four-megawatt potential—enough to power 1,000 homes.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-03/next-gen-wind-turbine

Some pretty interesting stuff. GE has designed an over-sized magnet/generator which works at slow speed (rpm) to eliminate the need for a gearbox.
Also I like the larger peak capacity. If we are going to use wind it should be fewer "large" capacity turbines in key locations rather than a magnitude more lower capacity ones.

[comtec]

1. kewl,

with more of these - or rather low-wind models - we'll start to get more wind generation...
the problem that still exists however is the danger to the local bird population.

can some one explain to my why a cage can not be designed around the blades like you have with those swamp crosser things?

[FBaggins]

2. Because they would be ugle as sin?

Not to mention adding significant cost and weight.

But "ugly" is enough... it's already hard to place these where people can see them when they're objectively attractive.

[joshcryer]

3. Large modern turbines don't kill that many birds, it turns out.

You may get as many as 5 deaths a year per turbine.

Now transmission lines, they cause a genocide every single year.

[OKIsItJustMe]

4. A cage might actually cause more deaths

Birds are killed by cell towers and TV/radio broadcast antennae (which have no blades at all.)
http://web1.audubon.org/news/pressRelease.php?id=1480&month=04-09
http://www.abcbirds.org/conservationissues/threats/towers.html
http://earthsky.org/biodiversity/fcc-considers-protecting-birds-from-towerkill

[Statistical]

10. I agree cage likely would kill more brids.

To a bird the cage is a solid object. It would be like putting up giant football field sized stopsigns out in an open field. You are going to get a lot of birds to hit one simply due to the sheer cross-sectional size.

Bird kills are probably unavailable.

However not reduce GHG emissions will end up killing a lot more.

[OKIsItJustMe]

11. "However not reduce GHG emissions will end up killing a lot more."

This (in essence) is the Audubon society's stance, although they also advocate placing turbines in such a way as to avoid heavy flight paths.

[madokie]

13. I can remember two that have flown into one of our windows within the last couple years

Had one that flew through my pickup driver door window that was down and hit the passenger side window head on. When I got into my truck there he was
laying on his back dead. It took me a little head and ass scratching to figure that one out but then I seen where he had hit the glass.
Until we have an honest nuclear industry I don't want to see any more nuclear power plants built and phase these that we have now out as their designed age is reached. some maybe even before.

[Nederland]

5. A cage 352 ft in diameter?

Think about it...

[pscot]

8. A mesh wheel bigger than a football field

suspended 280 feet in the air on a site selected for strong winds. What could possibly go wrong?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

6. Building such a large self-supporting cage (with fine enough mesh to keep out birds) is crazy.

[phantom power]

7. interesting. shit-canning the gear box avoids some important fail points and maintenance costs.

[Statistical]

9. Yeah it is interest design "twist"

I have to think that huge ass generator magnet was a reason why it wasn't tried before.
Smaller magnetic ring requires higher rpm.

Obviously GE thinks they have reached a point where the higher cost/weight in magnets is offset by less moving parts to fail.

[OKIsItJustMe]

12. FWIW: GE isn't the first company to come to this conclusion

http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/large_wind_turbines_generators_manufacturers.htm
http://www.windpowerengineering.com/design/mechanical/gearboxes/direct-drive-turbine-needs-no-gearbox/