Hello All:
I am a search consultant specializing in renewable energy and am looking to
increase my candidate pool for outstanding and future opportunities. If you are
perfectly happy where you are working, would you not want to at least hear about
that opportunity that you have been waiting for or dreaming about? If you are
actively seeking a job in the energy field or thinking about what else might be
out there, please contact me. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain
in the ability to better your circumstances. I would have more candidates and
you would have more opportunities...it is a win/win!!
I look forward to hearing from you!
ty@...
Re: The open-source hydrogen car set to change the industry
Posted by: "Frank Leslie" fleslie@... fleslie_fit_edu
Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:23 am (PST)
Did they ever get the fuel cell membrane to last more than ~5000 hours?
As it fails, the remedy is to put in a new cell and rebuild the old one.
Frank
Development of Hydrogen powered transport is being organised here :-
http://www.london.gov.uk/lhp/index.jsp
regards
ferrand
How hard is that? Do you need to be an electrician? I've joined the
earth4energy site and am going to start watching the videos - but I just
want to make sure I'm not wasting my time. I found those videos from a
really cool site... it's the Small Solar Panels
<http://smallsolarpanelsblog.com> site, and Tom Lawson has actually
responded to my questions and answered them right away. I am convinced
that I can do it myself, but then I see some posts talking about energy
units, and kilowatts, etc,.. and I get worried that this is over my
head. Do you think its possible to actually have my home run purely
from solar panels? What about wind generators - should I look into those
too?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The business model seems very beneficial. Lease the car and the manufacturer
handles all repairs at his own cost, to ensure there is a huge incentive to make
it a lasting piece of well engineered equipment, instead of a car with scheduled
breakdowns as in Detroit's business models.
 It's tough to make a judgment of the car itself though since it's still on
the drawing board. A big advantage of a car this size is that the manufacturer
makes no attempt to engage in competitive towing capacity TV commercials as with
pickups and SUVs,, the end result of which is to install gas hog differentials
designed for 1/4 mile races instead of gas mileage.
Is the car going to use a plastic body or carbon fiber?
 Railroad locomotives use large diesel engines to make electricity for the
electric motors that power the wheels. They do this to give immediate and
massive torque to the wheels, even on the first revolution of the motor. Â
Would this be a good solution for local delivery heavy trucks with a hydrogen
fueled motor?Â
The biggest challenge I see to the car are oily politicians. Despite them we
need to actually get alternative energy built fast enough and massively enough
to supply hydrogen for any transportation needs. Fuel cells are expensive, are
they going to use a different metal than the expensive platinum?Â
. I hope the cars get bigger, and if they are made of carbon fiber, some
safety elements are needed to protect the passengers from having no crumple
zone. Rapid stops cause aortic tearing and other injuries, which can kill
crash patients in cases where the passenger section hasn't been invaded by the
other vehicle, and the passenger is jerked about violently enough for this to
occur. This happens even in todays cars with crumple zones. It should happen
with increased frequency in a carbon fiber car and at a lower speed. Good
engineering might rectify this issue.
 I realize the electric motor is free of the costs of repairs to the "infernal"
combustion motor though, which is a huge maintenance problem eliminated,, along
with no need for a transmission. Does Prof. Nocera's work at MIT using the
cobalt and phosphate catalysts make electrolysis efficient enough to become
more economical than gasoline for solar or wind based hydrogen production?Â
When doing the calculation we have to add in the cost of two oils wars, and the
costs of all the consequences of those wars, and the deaths and illness from
burning gasoline.
I hope they don't write off ionic liquid batteries and other rapidly moving
battery technologies. I read recently about an ionic liquid battery that would
cost just a little more than a lead acid battery, but would hold 11 times more
energy than the same size most efficient lithium battery. I'd be hard pressed
to gamble on which battery technology will win, they are evolving so fast!Â
Cheap oil and gasoline have muted electric car battery research for so long, now
armed with new technology many research houses have declared war on oil using
new tools and knowledge. Which technology will win?
--- On Thu, 1/21/10, ferrand <ferrand@...> wrote:
From: ferrand <ferrand@...>
Subject: [renewable-energy] The open-source hydrogen car set to change the
industry
To: "new_energy@yahoogroups.com" <new_energy@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com" <renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com>,
"Sustainable-Communities@yahoogroups.com"
<Sustainable-Communities@yahoogroups.com>, "benbrangwyn@..."
<benbrangwyn@...>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010, 7:48 AM
The open-source hydrogen car set to change the industry
20th January, 2010
Cars are evil, right? But what if they ran on hydrogen, did 300 miles
per gallon, were leased rather than owned, and were produced under an
open source business model...
We have often been introduced to the car of tomorrow, but one company
has now created a car with the future in mind. But it is about far more
than just a car, it’s about a business model that is challenging the
very architecture of the auto industry.
Riversimple’s network electric car is a hydrogen fuel cell powered car,
with unique technologies that enable it to run on a 6kW fuel cell, with
a fuel consumption equivalent to 300 miles per gallon and greenhouse gas
emissions at 30g per km, well-to-wheel - less than a third of that from
the most efficient petrol-engine cars currently available.
It also has the potential to be 10 times cleaner still if the hydrogen
is produced from renewable energy.
Open source
But what is extraordinary about Riversimple is that their business model
is trying to move away from the current auto industry practice that has
left us with the inefficient, one-size-fits-all car.
The first departure from the conventional business plan is that the
designs of the car will be released under an open source licence. This
allows people to freely build on ideas and designs, speeding up
innovation and enabling technologies to be quickly improved, meeting the
needs of people rather than markets.
Full details here:-
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/401026/the_opensource_hydrogen_ca\
r_set_to_change_the_industry.html
regards
Ferrand
------------------------------------
==========================================================
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
----------------------------------------------------------
. This e-mail discussion list is managed by
 the American Wind Energy Association:
 http://www.awea.org
----------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
BUYER BEWARE!. I know someone that purchased these 98 cent a watt solar
panels. They had flaws and from what I was told they had bad solar cells.
They do not have a local warranty. The shipping was also a big cost problem.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In your dreams.
Lamar, do you actually think that the GRID won't be used to power these
recharging stations?
It takes a LOT of electricity, typically at high voltages to recharge an
Electric Car. To charge a Chevy Volt battery for instance, that is only halfway
discharged, will take about 10 kWh of electricity.
But you need to supply that in about 15 minutes or less.
And you have to do that as often as cars pull into a typical gas station, and be
able to recharge multiple cars at a time.
So it's pretty simple, no grid = no recharge station.
Oh, and it wasn't at all unethical, I simply put in the words that the writers
at USA Today would have assumed that everyone with any basic knowledge of
electric delivery in the US took for granted.
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, "solarman" <lamar5292@...> wrote:
>
> It is very sad when a person who has been proven wrong over and over resorts
to changing quotes from a respected news source to fit their opinions- it is
also completely unethical!
>
> The quote was a direct copy from a USA today article and you adding to it and
pretending that fixed it only shows your refusal to accept anyone elses opinions
except your own- even from professionals!
>
> LaMar UTAH USA
> www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
>
> --- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, "adoucette" <adoucette@> wrote:
> >
> > Let me fix that for you:
> >
> > "The U.S. Department of Energy awarded $2.4 billion in stimulus money in
August to build electric vehicles and support them with GRID BASED charging
stations. The goal is to promote clean energy and reduce U.S. dependence on oil,
> >
> > You're welcome.
> >
> > Arthur
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, "solarman" <lamar5292@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > "The U.S. Department of Energy awarded $2.4 billion in stimulus money in
August to build electric vehicles and support them with charging stations. The
goal is to promote clean energy and reduce U.S. dependence on oil, says David
Sandalow, assistant secretary of Energy for policy and international affairs."
> > >
> > > http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-11-03-electric-cars_N.htm
> > >
> > > http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9996353-54.html
> > >
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/business/09electric.html
> > >
> > > http://cbs5.com/environment/electric.car.charging.2.901628.html
> > >
> > > http://www.seattlepi.com/transportation/411722_electric2.html
> > >
> > > http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/state&id=7184873
> > >
> > >
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/09/first-mcdonalds-with-elec_n_229056.html
> > >
> > > http://www.physorg.com/news154288469.html
> > >
> > >
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/01/02/20100102greencar0102.html
> > >
> > > LaMar UTAH USA
> > > www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
> > >
> >
>
When Turbines are rated they are done at the maximum they can produce at the
highest wind speed they are rated for.
It's a convenient convention that allows one to speak of a 2 MW Turbine and for
everyone to be talking about the same thing.
In use, of course, the wind doesn't blow at the maximum speed the turbine is
rated for all year long and so clearly a turbine will never produce the output
that you would get if you just multiply that ultimate power rating by total
hours per year.
Different turbines vary of course, and for simplicity sake, I'm only discussing
modern large high efficiency turbines installed in good wind areas, and for
those we can expect that over the course of a year they will produce about 30%
of that theoretical maximum.
So a company installing a turbine knows, based on the Turbine rating and the
quality of the wind site, the approximate amount of power they can expect to get
from a given turbine over a year, and because we know wind by season, the
company also has a decent idea of when to expect that wind power, and because of
decent weather forcasting, can predict pretty closely what they will get on a
day to day basis.
Just like someone who installs a PV panel. They know that even if it is rated at
300 watts, it still won't produce any power at night, that they will get less
power per day in the winter and probably none if it is expected to snow
tomorrow.
I don't know where you went wrong with your math, but:
2 MW X 24 hrs = 48 MWh per day.
48 MWh X 365 days = 17,520 MWh per year (Max MWh possible)
17,520 MWh X .30 = 5,256 MWh per year (Typical MWh produced)
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, OffGridSolar@... wrote:
>
> 30% of wind capacity. So let me get this in simple terms. A wind generator
> rated at 2 MW is actually putting out 30% of its rating or 600 KW a hour?
> At 600 KW how can you justify spending over $2 million dollar on 30%
> efficiency? Now the math has changed. That 2 MW unit in a perfect world can
only
> produce 14,400 KW a day or in a 720 hour period or one month that 2 MW wind
> generator can produce 10,368,000 KW a month? Or just over 120 MW a year in
> a perfect world.
Sure you need to know that info!
But I advise people to beware of people claiming many years of service and
experience in attempt to get your business.
These groups have become fishing holes for a few people promoting solar
calculators and energy audit software.
If someone claims experience ask them for their NABCEP certification!
LaMar UTAH USA
www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, OffGridSolar@... wrote:
>
> Lamar, In a way they are right. To me you need to know the electrical
> loads and conditions of the property. If the property is in the woods or
there
> is a big mountain south of the property this could change everything. Also
> some people don't realize that if you buy 5 KW of solar panels it will put
> out 5 KW max of DC power. But when you convert DC to AC you loose power.
> Also the loads differ from seasons. Here in Florida we have winter weather
> two weeks a year. But we have summer conditions 9 months a year. We use more
> electric power for heating than cooling. So we always look at the winter
> months on a electric bill to give us the peak periods. My home use to use
> 1,800 KW a month. They I cut it down to 655 KW a month without solar panels.
> Now the size of solar has been reduced almost 2/3. So there are many things
> that everyone can do to reduce their electric bills. It is all about money,
> and time. In a years time I have saved 13,740 KW. Now understanding that
> is the best way over time to size a solar PV system to go off grid. I know I
> have been doing this for over 40 years.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
The exhaust is water, it's easily recoverable from the exhaust, it could also
very easily be purified , the engine is essentially distilling the water. It
would remove the pesticides that poison our water. It could be made better
than what you drink from the faucet at home with almost zero effort.
--- On Thu, 1/21/10, OffGridSolar@... <OffGridSolar@...> wrote:
From: OffGridSolar@... <OffGridSolar@...>
Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Re: [Generalnewssnippets] Fuel Cell Company
Unveils Ho...
To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010, 2:16 PM
Â
Again Water. We took corn to make gas or food for fuel and now you want to
take water to make fuel. Store the fuel in a fuel cell. Another band aid
solution! How long can we think we can live if we use water for fuel? How
many gallons of gas do we use a day? It will take 130% more water to replace
gas. How do we benefit? We need to get away from fuel. How is hydrogen a
renewable energy? Lets see. It takes energy to produce hydrogen. This is not a
renewable energy at all. Again it is a band aid to our energy problem.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Can someone explain to me why there is such a need to defend the efficiency of
solar verses wind?
I have a wind turbine as well as solar installed at my house and my non-profit
is installing wind/solar systems in small villages in West Africa.
For some reason I don't feel the need to get in these arguments that you all
seem to love. Solar doesn't work at night and wind turbines don't work if there
is no wind.
Is there really any need for all of this debate?
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Leslie" <fleslie@...>
To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 10:02:35 AM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
Subject: RE: [renewable-energy] Re: The largest wind farm project in the US
announced
Hold it!
When you multiply 2 MW by 24 hrs, you also multiply the units, getting 48 MWh,
the unit of energy.
Power = energy/time, while energy = power * time. Electricity is sold by the kWh
by most utilities, but between themselves or a broker, it's now about $35/MWh on
the spot market.
MW per year is incorrect unless you are refering to PV, for instance, where a
plant is making modules at xxxx MW per year production. A thermal plant can
change its power by more or less fuel at yyy/hour.
Let's not mix power and energy.
Frank
________________________________
From: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com [mailto: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
] On Behalf Of adoucette
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 10:59 AM
To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [renewable-energy] Re: The largest wind farm project in the US
announced
Correction
The math is quite well understood.
I on the otherhand can't multiply worth a damn.
2 MW X 24 hrs = 48 MWs per day
48 MW X 365 days = 17,520 MW per year (Max MW possible)
17,520 MW X .30 = 5,256 MW per year (Typical MW produced)
(thanks to Dot Sulock at UNC for pointing out my error)
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:renewable-energy%40yahoogroups.com>, "adoucette" <adoucette@...> wrote:
>
> The math is quite well understood.
> For good wind sites, modern turbines will produce a bit less than 30% of rated
capacity. In other words a 2 MW turbine could theoreticaly produce 48 MWs per
day = 8,760 MWs per year, but will actually produce about 2,500 MWs. For most
windsites the turbines will also produce a higher percent of that power in the
Spring and Fall (our seasons with the highest average wind speed)
>
> This is all taken into account when the Wind farms are built. They know pretty
well how much power they will get and about when they will get it, but that
weather on any given day is the deciding factor on how much we actually get.
>
> Solar is EXACTLY the same, we have excellent long term Solar Insolation maps
which tell us how much sun a given location is going to AVERAGE over the year,
and we know we get nothing when the sun is not up and we get the higher percent
of power from April to September but that weather on any given day is the
deciding factor on how much we actually get. This is all taken into account when
Solar installations are evaluated.
>
> What's the good news?
>
> A MIX of both Solar and Wind produces fewer times when neither are producing
power. An extensive Solar and Wind system with say natural and pumped hydro
storage, a 20% Nuclear Base load capacity and then distributed back up gas
turbine generators for handling peak loads and equipment outages might be all we
need.
>
> Arthur
>
> --- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:renewable-energy%40yahoogroups.com>, OffGridSolar@ wrote:
> >
> > Why does the wind farm people tout the math of generating electric power? I
> > have never seen a wind farm without at least 2-5 wind generators not
> > working at all. Yet they still make claims of 845 MW of available power.
Most
> > wind farms have 7% to 8% of the wind mills not working. If you have 335 wind
> > mills installed this means that over 23 units are not working for the 7%.
> > For the 8% this means that 27 units are not working. The same holds true for
> > clouds on solar farms. Does anyone know why this is the math that they
> > claim is acceptable? To me it is like being a elected official, in other
words
> > no one knows the truth. I support renewable energy but lets try to be
> > honest about the math.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
?
lol  - Does this make sense to anyone?
________________________________
From: "OffGridSolar@..." <OffGridSolar@...>
To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, January 21, 2010 2:16:30 PM
Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Re: [Generalnewssnippets] Fuel Cell Company
Unveils Ho...
Â
Again Water. We took corn to make gas or food for fuel and now you want to
take water to make fuel. Store the fuel in a fuel cell. Another band aid
solution! How long can we think we can live if we use water for fuel? How
many gallons of gas do we use a day? It will take 130% more water to replace
gas. How do we benefit? We need to get away from fuel. How is hydrogen a
renewable energy? Lets see. It takes energy to produce hydrogen. This is not a
renewable energy at all. Again it is a band aid to our energy problem.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We've just completed a new six turbine wind farm animation based upon a site
layout.
http://www.green-tech-art.com/services/services_wind_farm_after.html
Based on a prospective layout, this animation shows how your wind turbine
installation will look upon completion. This can also be viewed from multiple
locations, letting you place the camera to show concerned parties the view. By
including the local skyline your audience will have a clearer understanding on
the impact your installation will have in their area.
Green-Tech-Art delivers artwork and animation to generate interest and bring
interactivity for all your presentation needs:
-Public Reviews
-Classroom Lectures
-Online Coursework
-Investor Presentations
-Trade Shows
-Website Development
We also offer a 15% discount on all services for educational and non-profit
organizations.
Thanks,
Patrick Lowery
President
Green-Tech-Art
www.green-tech-art.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thought I'd seen technologies that store hydrogen , and without using
pressurization. I've seen companies beginning to sell them.
--- On Thu, 1/21/10, Frank Leslie <fleslie@...> wrote:
From: Frank Leslie <fleslie@...>
Subject: RE: [renewable-energy] Re: [Generalnewssnippets] Fuel Cell Company
Unveils Home H...
To: "renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com" <renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, January 21, 2010, 10:32 AM
Â
The hydrogen must be stored in a high-pressure tank on the vehicle. There
is little volume in the fuel cell. Typically, this is at 6000-10000 psi.
There's no such thing as a free lunch, and more energy must be used to compress
the H2 to the high pressure. Roughly, a roomful of H2 has energy equivalent to a
gallon of gasoline.
Now, most H2 is made from cracking natural gas because it's cheaper. Small
electrolysers are used for welding H2, but also for vehicles. Look up "Dr.
Addison Baines and hydrogen car" and examine his home system.
Frank
____________ _________ _________ __
From: renewable-energy@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:renewable-energy@ yahoogroups.
com] On Behalf Of adoucette
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 11:07 AM
To: renewable-energy@ yahoogroups. com
Subject: [renewable-energy] Re: [Generalnewssnippet s] Fuel Cell Company Unveils
Home H...
NO NO NO.
A FUEL CELL can use HYDROGEN as its 'fuel' source.
HYDROGEN can be made from WATER by using ELECTRICTY that comes from RENEWABLE
sources like WIND, PV and HYDRO.
When the hydrogen BURNS it creates WATER.
Storing that energy as hydrogen in a Fuel Cell makes the energy PORTABLE, and
Fuel cells, unlike our current battery technology are not particularly heavy or
dependent on LOTS of either Lead, Cadmium or Lithium.
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@ yahoogroups. com<mailto:renewable- energy%40yahoogr
oups.com> , OffGridSolar@ ... wrote:
>
> I just wonder if fuel cell are part of the solution and not part of the
> problem. OK a way to store fuel. Are we still on that subject. Fuel? The
> burning of fuel is not a solution. It is part of the problem. OK, here is the
> truth. "We can not fix a problem by thinking the same way that caused the
> problem." There is nothing renewable about fuel! You burn it and that is that!
> It can not renew itself. Bio Fuels, Coal, Oil, Uranium, Natural Gas, Tar
> Sand. These are all fuels. Burn them they create carbon and poison. This is
> the problem. Remember corn or food for fuel? Again another band aid to the
> problem. We should be looking for solutions not band aids. This will not
> heal itself over time. We know the solution and for some reason we keep on
> going off the path. Fuel Cells, Bio Fuels and others are not forms of
> renewable energy at all. If you took all the fuels you can produce 10,800,000
> Terra Watts of power per year. The sun's energy Produces 350,000,000 Terra
> Watts a day. Some people think you can only capture 6 hours a day of solar PV
> energy. This is the wrong thinking. The sun shines all 24 hours a day.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
WOW!
Using the Solar Calculator (see file section) for a Grid Tied system, I sized
for a Phoenix residence displacing an average of 10 kWh per day. Found it would
require ~34 panels (67 V/.9A) and with the 30% US Tax Credit and assuming a 2%
per year increase in electrical rates, would break even in it's 16th year, and
over a 20 year period, provide savings of ~2,500.
Power Center - Inverter $2,599
Solar Panels $2,040
Panel Racks $1,602
Wiring/Installation (10%) $624
TOTAL $6,865
30% Tax Credit $2,060
Final Cost $4,806
That's $2.36 per watt installed after tax credit.
I'm a bit concerned about the warrenty. This is the first time I think I've seen
the product guarantee so much lower than the power warranty, and am not sure
what to make of it:
power warranty 25 years (80%), 12 years (90%)*
product guarantee 5 years*
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, Steve Spence <steve@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.sunelec.com has cheap panels, $0.98 / watt
>
> You can find some good DIY resources on our website.
>
> Steve Spence
> Renewable energy and self sufficiency
> http://www.green-trust.org
> http://makingthewebwork.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
> Paul C wrote:
> >
> >
> > Steve, can you point me to affordable sources to purchase PV panels, and/or
> > good instructions on how to make them yourself?
> >
Ontario is going green in a big way.
The province signed a deal Thursday with a South Korean consortium that will
invest $7 billion here in the largest wind and solar power initiative of its
kind.
The deal is expected to generate 16,000 jobs over six years and make Ontario a
leader in wind turbine manufacturing. But ratepayers will subsidize the
agreement with an average annual hydro bill increase of $1.60. Full story, A6
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/754308--wind-power-deal-gets-7b-wings
_______________________________________________________________________
Wind power could meet 20 percent or more of electricity demand in the eastern
United States by 2024, if the effort includes sufficient planning and billions
in spending for transmission lines and other needs, a government study has
concluded.
Quantcast
The report, prepared by the Department of Energy and National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, assumed potential development of thousands of wind farms across the
East. Those potential new generating resources include more than 4,400 megawatts
worth of wind turbine capacity off the coast of Delaware, and even greater
supplies from Maryland, New Jersey and other shoreline states.
"Twenty percent wind is an ambitious goal, but this study shows that there are
multiple scenarios through which it can be achieved," David Corbus, project
manager for the laboratory, said in a written statement. "Whether we're talking
about using land-based wind in the Midwest, offshore wind in the East or any
combination of wind power resources, any plausible scenario requires
transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that
immediately."
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100122/BUSINESS/1220302
____________________________________________________________________
Westar Energy Inc. says it has acquired rights for a new wind farm in western
Kansas near Spearville.
The company said Tuesday it has reached an agreement with Infinity Wind Power to
develop the site for up to 500 megawatts of wind energy. The first phase is
expected to be about 200 megawatts and be completed late next year or in 2012.
The project's timeline depends on how fast new transmission lines are
constructed in the western part of the state.
Westar owns or buys power from three other wind farms in Kansas. The company
owns a 99 megawatt wind farm near Leoti, has a 100 megawatt share in a farm near
Nashville, Kan., and buys 96 megawatts from one near Concordia.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9611799
_____________________________________________________________________
Wind Power is the Future!
LaMar UTAH USA
www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
Hi all,
There are interesting innovations developing that may be of interest to you.
Even if you can't attend the conference, check out their website.
Feb 16-18 Eilat-Eilot Int'l Renewable Energy Conference & Exhibition offers a
central platform for technological innovations
Did you know that Israel has over 200 renewable energy startups?
Join us and be a part of Tomorrow by being a part of those who prepare for it
Today!
Save this date: 16-18 February 2010
For the exciting 3rd Eilat-Eilot International Renewable Energy Conference &
Exhibition at the Herods & Dan Hotels, Eilat, Israel
For more information, see http://www.eilatenergy.org/
The Eilat-Eilot Conference is coming up. Leading technological start-ups in the
field of renewable energy and energy conservation will be given a central
platform.
See the Eilat-Eilot Vision:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-oUv3ISJuE
This ambitious program is working to transform the Eilat-Eilot area into a post
fossil economy, generating more than 100% of their energy from renewable energy
sources and implementing a sustainable economy.
The Eilat-Eilot renewable energy conference is a not only a showpiece of
Israel's renewable energy industry, but an on-site status report of this
exciting program. Participants will learn about the Eilat region's unique model
for solving the energy crisis while creating exceptional economic growth.
Conference activities include a tour of the Eilat-Eilot Renewable Energy
Administration's project sites. Participants will find a wealth of technologies
they may want to apply in their own localities.
Leading international and local speakers, will discuss global tactics, means,
and actual fieldwork for a massive application of renewable energy and energy
conservation.
You can also escape winter to enjoy excellent weather and Eilat's Red Sea
beaches. Eilat's proximity to Israel's unique renewable energy projects is a
winning combination creating a hospitable and fruitful working environment.
Please note that technological enterprises interested in taking part in this
exciting conference are invited to contact us to receive details on the options
available for sponsorship and participation.
And please be in touch with:
Joe van Zwaren
Organizing Committee
Eilat-Eilot International Renewable Energy Conference
972 - (0) 54 - 973 00 29
joe@...
Event Sponsorship, Reservations and Presentations
Contact: David Schwartz
972 (0)50-991-0320
david@...
For Sponsorship by Israeli companies and organizations:
Amnon Ben Dahan, Conference Israeli Sponsorships Manager
054-6610334
amnonbd@...
Eilat-Eilot Commercial and Alternative Energy Opportunities
Contact: Noam Ilan
972 (0) 54-979-9153
noam@...
2010/1/24 George Tweedie <gat1029@...>:
Hi-
I'm brand new to the group and I'm interested in getting into steam
power. One question though, how does one get water into the boiler
from the water tank without shutting down the entire system? I've
been reading Mike Browns Basics of Steam Engineering and he says
something about pumping it in but the boiler has between 100 and 250
psi. in it so that would make it kind of diffucult pumping
water in wouldn't it?
More questions coming for certian once I get further along in the
process of building it.
Thanks in advance! George
oOo
George
My late father once designed a steam car [ about 1930] it was to use a
Flash or Monotube Boiler, see this for instance
http://www.green-trust.org/steam.htmhttp://www.steamcar.net/flying-steam-7.html
and put "monotube or flash boilers" into Google for more links.There is
a DIY version somewhere. Reportedly very safe, but I do not know about
test requirements, testing is not required for model boat versions see
"monotube or flash boilers testing" in Google
Pressurising was to be done by a hand pump, on start up, steam raising
took about 60 seconds - comparable to an electric start, - and once
steam pressure was "up" a small steam operated pump maintained pressure.
Fuel was keroscene [lamp oil] Engine would have been quite silent,
maximum torque at no speed, - hence good acceleration - no gearbox, and
ability to as fast backwards as forwards. i.e a reciprocating engine
with valve gear like a railway locomotive.
Remember as tube sizes get smaller the ratio of the outer [heat
exchange] surface to tube liquid flow area increases, i.e an 8mm tube
[or smaller] is a better item for flash boilers than larger diameters.
The same probably applies to CSP [Concentrated Solar Power]
regards
Ferrand
_______________________________________________
Generalnewssnippets mailing list
Generalnewssnippets@...http://claverton-energy.com/mailman/listinfo/generalnewssnippets_claverton-energ\
y.com
Grid intertie has several advantages, it`s cheaper, simpler, greener than stand
alone PV. I know personally 7 off grid households, they all have run thru
several sets of expensive, toxic, heavy batteries, they all use dirty, noisy,
PIA backup generators for the cloudy periods we get, they all only get 80-85% of
the energy they put into batteries back from them, they all fill their battery
banks when they have two sunny days in a row, then the energy is wasted. With a
grid intertied PV system, 100% of any electricity that you produce but don`t
need immediately, goes into the grid, in the seven states TVA serves, you get
paid 12 cents a KWH MORE than TVA charges. This way your neighbors can use your
excess solar electricity, and you get a credit, if you run a surplus for 12
consecutive months, you get a check.
http://www.tva.com/greenpowerswitch/partners/
=====================================
Here is a friends 4.1KW grid tied PV system, I was there for the connection.
http://view2.fatspaniel.net/PV2Web/merge?&view=PV/standard/Simple&eid=238891
=======================================================
http://www.txses.org/PVgrid.php
One increasingly popular way of using photovoltaics is what is known as
"grid-attach". In this configuration, the consumer stays attached to the
electric company (the "grid"). The PV system forces whatever it produces
directly into the building's AC lines. If the PV system is producing more than
the building uses, the meter runs backwards. If the building is using more than
the PV system is producing, the difference is made up by energy from the
electric company.
This type of attachment has a number of advantages:
a.. It is cheaper, because there is no need for batteries.
b.. It needs less maintenance, again because of the lack of batteries.
c.. It makes the most effective possible use of the energy that the PV
generates: because the grid is always able to accept any surplus, the PV panels
can always be operated at their most efficient point.
A Utility Intertie System Without Batteries
This is the simplest and most cost effective way to connect PV modules to
regular utility power.
All incoming PV-generated electrons are converted to household AC power by the
intertie inverter and delivered to the main household circuit breaker panel,
where they displace an equal number of utility-generated electrons. That's power
you didn't have to buy from the utility company. If the incoming PV power
exceeds what your house can use at the moment, the excess electrons will be
forced out through your electric meter, turning it backward. If the PVpower is
insufficient, that shortfall is automatically and seamlessly made up by utility
power.
Have you considered going completely energy independent with a solar power
system? That is, do you long for going off-grid, free from the expensive rates
of utility companies? I had always thought that off-grid was clearly the way to
go, until I did a bit more research.
There are a number of pros and cons for you to consider when implementing a
solar power system that will take you off-grid. First, let's review the three
types of solar power systems:
1.. On-Grid Battery Solar Power System
2.. On-Grid Solar Power System without Battery
3.. Off-Grid Solar Power System
With an on-grid battery system, a back-up battery is included as part of the
solar power system. Batteries can store excess energy generated by the solar
panels, and even send the surplus electricity out to the grid. Of course, the
system is connected to the electricity grid which is why it is called "on-grid."
The solar panel system includes solar panels, a charge controller, battery,
inverter, AC service entrance and AC subpanel, and a utility meter.
You can still stay on-grid without a battery, however. These solar power
systems are the simplest and least expensive to set up. All that is included is
the PV array, an inverter, AC service entrance and utility meter. Your system
is connected to the grid, but there is no battery back-up. The obvious drawback
is that when power goes out in your area, your solar power system will also shut
down.
Finally, there is the off-grid solar power system. There is no tie-in to the
electricity grid. Batteries are required as part of the system in order to
store excess energy.
Turning to a comparison of on-grid vs. off-grid solar power systems, there are
clear advantages and disadvantages to each of these.
Off-grid systems are the only way to go if you live in a remote area where there
are no utilities. In fact, you can get a better deal on rural properties that
are not connected to the grid because of the expense of running lines out to the
home.
But, if you have the ability to connect to the grid, why wouldn't you? First
and foremost is the idea of independence from utilities. No more worries about
rate increases. If the power goes out, your lights and refrigerator (and
television and radio) are not affected. Second, due to the cost of an off-grid
system, many homeowners find themselves forced to conserve energy rather than
expand the system to generate more power. This is very appealing to the
environmentally-minded.
What are the down-sides for going off-grid? Instead of the utility company
maintaining your system, you'll be doing it all yourself. Batteries will have
to be replaced (about every 5-15 years) at a cost of at least $1000. In
addition to the cost of the batteries is the inefficiency, which increases as
the batteries age. They start out at about 90% efficiency. Moreover, when
you're not connected to the grid, excess energy that is generated is not fed out
to the utility to give you an energy credit (this can happen with on-grid
systems). Off-grid systems must use the surplus or lose it. Finally, most
off-grid systems include a back-up generator, which can be very expensive.
For an on-grid system, the primary upside over off-grid is that you can draw on
grid-based electricity when necessary, rather than either go without power, or
use a fossil-fuel based generator. You still get a great deal of independence
and cheap electricity, but it may be more reliable in many ways.
The biggest question for you is whether you will include a battery or not.
Battery-based on-grid systems cost about 35-50% more than without, but you lose
the opportunity for back-up without a battery. Also consider the cost of
utility line extension for grid-ties. If you are close to the line, it may cost
you nothing. But if it will be a major extension, it could be very expensive
and you may decide that staying off-grid is the best way to go for your home.
If you tie into the grid, be sure you are clear about the question of net
metering (when you can sell back excess energy to the grid for credit).
Fortunately, there are many solar power system options for homeowners. No
matter your circumstance or where you live, you can find a way to use solar
energy to power your life!
Library of State-Specific Interconnection and Net-metering documents-
http://www.irecusa.org/index.php?id=30
If money were no object, I'd opt for a grid-tied system with batteries. While
such a system provides the best of both worlds, it is also the most costly. A
grid-tied system with batteries must be able to automatically disconnect from
the electrical grid when the power fails. If not, it could be dangerous for
utility workers in the area. As a major advantage of such a system, it uses all
of the free-power available, only switching to costly grid-supplied power as a
last resort. Switching is automatic, based on setup parameters. The system can
be set to be very gentle on the batteries, extending their life, or be set to
use them to a greater extent, resulting in a lower electric bill. It must be
great to have choices like that!
I think it's reasonable to assume that while grid reliability problems may
increase in the future, the grid is never going to disappear completely. As long
as it is there part of the time, those attached can take from it and contribute
to it. And those who supply power to the grid are paid, or at least credited,
for their contributions. So unless electric rates or grid-connection charges are
prohibitively high, being grid-tied makes more sense from a financial standpoint
than an off-grid system does. And since an off-grid system with batteries
efficiently uses the energy generated by the sun, it's a good "green" choice.
While a batteryless grid-tied system is efficient and cost-effective, it must be
embarrassing to have a large PV array, but no power when the grid goes down.
What would the neighbors think? Still, this type of system is the best "green"
choice, and it requires the least maintenance.
Efficiency - When your batteries are full, they're full. No matter how hard the
wind blows or the sun shines, you can't harvest anything more. A grid
connection allows you to harvest all the power from your system. When you have
extra, you sell it to the grid so someone else can use it. When sun or wind is
scarce, you tap in and buy some back.
Cost - Solar equipment is expensive. You can run a few lights with a car
battery, but if you're serious about powering your home you'll probably want a
set of good-quality deep-cycle batteries. These can set you back $300-$1,500
apiece. You can expect to have to replace them about every 7 years - maybe
longer with good care. If you have batteries you'll also need a charge
controller - another $150-$600 or more. Connecting to the grid allows you to
dispense with batteries altogether if you choose.
Convenience - Off-grid systems require constant monitoring. Flooded lead-acid
batteries are long-lived and cost-effective, but they need frequent maintenance.
Living off-grid also requires you to adjust your energy consumption according to
available power. If you have a few days without much sun or wind, you may have
to ration your power use or supplement with a generator.
Self-reliance - No doubt about it, when you're off-grid you're not at the mercy
of the power lines. There is something to be said for being able to offer your
neighbors water, for instance, after a tornado goes through and they have no
power to their pumps.
Politics - You may have strong feelings about your power company. You're
entitled to them; just don't let them act against your own best interests.
Ask nearly any PV installer, and they'll tell you it makes sense to connect to
the grid. But at the end of the day, it's a decision you need to make for
yourself. And don't forget - it's not an either-or decision. You can
grid-connect and have an emergency battery back-up, too - the best of both
worlds!
With grid tie and battery backup, you will take about a 10% hit on overall
efficiency of your system. That being said, it is still about 20% more
efficient then an off grid systems where you are drawing off the battery
every day and having to recharge them. Batteries are only about 80%
efficient meaning you have to put 20% more energy into them then you can
take out.
Outback is a very good brand for this. the thing to know tho, is that
the inverter is complicated and more expensive if it charges batteries too.
That means that when the batteries are full, the inverters efficiency is still
lower because of it's use as a charger, your not getting the full benefit of a
grid tied inverter, it's less efficient.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Huh?
He said 300 MPG, you can't arbitrarily cut the gallon of Hydrogen down to 2/3
gallon because that's the ratio of hydrogen to oxygen in Water.
A Fuel cell would be a lighter weight propulsion system than an IC engine and it
would also operate with a much higher efficiency drive train, so 300 MPG doesn't
seem implausible for a car similar to a Prius in size and design.
The BIGGER question is what the Fuel Cell and that gallon of Hydrogen will cost
you in comparison to more conventional power trains and fuels.
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, OffGridSolar@... wrote:
>
> 300 MPG Car? I bet you no one can prove that claim. Hydrogen! Well lets
> look at hydrogen in a math format. Water is made of 2 parts hydrogen and one
> part air. Now that means that for every gallon of water you get 2/3 of a
> gallon of hydrogen. 2/3 of a gallon to go 300 miles? Something is very wrong.
> Friction must come into play. I will go out on a limb and say BS. It can
> not be done. It is a con or a scam.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
NYC Tells Electric Car Owners to Get Their Own Outlets
"New York City often startles people, and it stayed true to form in a recent
analysis done by McKinsey & Company for the city's PlaNYC planning group,
"Exploring Electric Vehicle Adoption in New York City."
In particular, one of the report's conclusions may come as a shock to many
electric-vehicle advocates: It turns out you really don't need very many public
charging points to get people to use EVs.
Over the next five years, the likely early adopters will simply adapt their
behavior to the limitations of the EVs:
Early adopters do not appear to need a high-density public charging network.
While the availability of charging at retail and curbside locations may be
reassuring to the average driver concerned about range limitations, the study
suggests that the earliest consumers will be willing to change their driving
behavior and parking location, given their strong desire to purchase EVs.
Thus, a dense public charging network will not be a strong priority for early
adopters."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583555,00.html
_________________________________________________________________
Heartland Becoming Heart of Electric Car Industry
U.S. News Rankings & Reviews - ‎Jan 21, 2010‎
Think manufactures the Think City, an electric car. Larger than the Smart
ForTwo, but smaller than a Mini Cooper, the City's body is made of plastic ...
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/daily-news/100121-Heartland-Bec\
oming-Heart-of-Electric-Car-Industry/
___________________________________________________________________
INDIANAPOLIS — State officials' vision of Indiana becoming the hub of a
blossoming electric-vehicle industry inched closer to reality Thursday when
EnerDel, a rapidly growing lithium battery maker, announced plans to expand.
It was the latest in a growing line of companies — four in the last month — that
produce parts for electric vehicles to commit to planting roots in the state.
Taken together, Gov. Mitch Daniels said, the announcements demonstrate Indiana's
status as a future location for an industry that simultaneously promotes clean
energy and energy independence.
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2010/jan/22/battery-makers-plan-electrifies-sta\
te-officials/
____________________________________________________________________
Tesla Motors and the U.S. Department of Energy on Thursday signed a landmark
$465 million loan agreement that will allow the electric car maker to build a
power train manufacturing plant in Palo Alto.
The agreement also paves the way for Tesla Motors to build a facility in
Southern California where it will manufacture its upcoming all-electric Model S
sedan.
It is only the second loan agreement the Department of Energy has signed with an
"advanced technology vehicle manufacturer" under a program created in the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007. The federal agency first reached a $5.9
billion loan agreement with Ford Motor Co. in September.
http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_14243440?nclick_check=1
___________________________________________________________________
Electric cars are the future!
LaMar UTAH USA
www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
Here is another possibility worth considering. Geothermal power units. They work
24 X7 X 365 days. The efficiency level runs between 90 to 95%. They produce
clean reliable amperage loads which is so badly needed by electronics equipment.
They have no cost of fuel or distribution requirements.
There are many that have been in business for years, and there is a flood of
activity to develop new ones. They produce more megawatts of electricity than
wind or solar combined.
For the solar crowd, realize that our iron core planet is the largest solar
collector in our world. Those beautiful northern and southern lights are the
result of gigantic, chaotic convergence of photons to electrons that ground to
the Earth itself.
I've said my piece, and wish you all well.
Bill -- -- Yahoo! Groups, geothermalenergy
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Stop using a strawman arguement.
No one has EVER said that the Smartgrid required installation of smart wires.
The first step to make the grid smarter is to put in a Meter that can track WHEN
the power is used, not just how much power is used.
A smarter meter can also allow residential users to "spin the meter backwards",
which a lot of meters today don't allow, thus eliminating a significant benefit
to people who would like to install PV, but can't justify it because a lot of
the power is produced when they don't need it. If you can spin the meter
backwards, then you are essentially using the grid like a storage battery, but
with NO COST to do so. This makes PV much more affordable and if this capability
becomes widely available because of the upgrade of meters, then it will
dramatically increase the amount of PV installed in the US.
In fact, if you couple the 30% US Tax Credit with the ability to spin the meter
backwards, and peak pricing, you would probably see a massive increase in the
number of annual PV installations.
People like you and Lamar who are saying, the smart grid sucks so don't spend
any money to upgrade our grid, are doing a HUGE disservice to the PV industry
and the drive to increase the amount of renewable energy used in the US.
You seem to keep forgetting that virtually all wind power, which DWARFS PV power
by the way, is delivered to homeowners by the grid.
All large Thermal Solar systems deliver power by the grid.
All large GeoThermal systems deliver power by the grid.
All Large Hydropower systems deliver power by the grid.
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, OffGridSolar@... wrote:
>
> Stop using the term smart grid. The grid is analog in design and function.
> There is nothing smart about a wire. This is what is wrong with this type
> of thinking. Does anyone know how to make a wire smart? We did not save the
> steam trains. Why are we trying to save a technology that is over 100 years
> old? The term smart grid is for getting money only. It; in time will prove
> to be a waste of time and money. The only smart grid is to have no grid at
> all. Now that will stimulate our economy. Spending money on something that
> is going to break over and over again makes no sense. Some people think
> that money cures everything. This is why we are in the economic problems of
> today. Why spend money on a car you can not drive? Better yet. Why buy a car
> that will break all the time? To me and a lot of others think the smart
> grid is dumb.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Samsung C&T Corp. and the Korea Electric Power Corporation have won massive
order to build the world's largest wind and solar power clusters in Ontario,
Canada.
The firm's CEO Chi Sung-ha and Kepco Executive Vice President Jung Chan-ki
concluded the deal with Ontario Minister of Energy and Infrastructure Brad
Duguid on Thursday, Ontario time. The project is worth $6.7 billion,
international media reported.
Under the agreement, the Korean consortium will operate the new wind and solar
clusters for 20 years. The complex will be 202.3 square kilometers (78 square
miles), about one-third the size of Seoul. Domestic and overseas companies
including Dongkuk S&C, a Korea-based wind tower manufacturer, will develop
equipment for use at the site.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2915683
______________________________________________________________________
Colorado State University is getting a new, 2-megawatt solar power system that's
thought to be the largest such system on any U.S. university campus.
The university on Friday will dedicate the 8,000-panel system, which covers 15
acres and can supply up to 10 percent of the electricity needs of CSU's
Foothills Campus. The project was announced in August 2009, although terms of
the deal weren't disclosed.
http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/earth_to_power/2010/01/colorado_state_\
university_switching_on_solar-power_system.html
____________________________________________________________________
Regardless of how much you'd like to, if you rent an apartment or a condo you
can't put in solar power. Even if you own a house, but its gables are badly
angled against sun exposure, or it has a shaded rooftop; you can't add solar.
And if you live in a state like Colorado, that is 70% powered by coal, and you
are cognisant of what that is doing to our future, that presents you with a
problem.
A solution is suggested by Colorado State Rep Claire Levy (D-Boulder) who has
proposed a bill that would allow multiple people to buy into shares of an
off-site solar installation and, like shareholders, all receive a portion of the
benefits of the solar energy, from installation cost reductions to any
net-metering credits for excess electric generation.
The bill would allow off-site solar installations that are community-owned to
qualify for the state's renewable energy rebates. These are offered through Xcel
Energy, to meet a Renewable Energy Standard that requires the utility to add
more renewable energy.
http://cleantechnica.com/2010/01/20/proposed-bill-would-allow-communities-to-sha\
re-solar-benefits/
_____________________________________________________________________
TINTON FALLS, N.J., Jan. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- Mercury Solar Systems, one of the
leading solar integrators on the East Coast, today announced that it has
partnered with SunRun, the nation's leading residential solar company, to
deliver New Jersey homeowners affordable solar power.
Jared Haines, President, Mercury Solar Systems, said, "New Jersey homeowners can
now make a minimal upfront investment to enjoy clean electricity. We believe
this partnership is a breakthrough approach to making solar very affordable and
hassle free for any homeowner and are honored that SunRun has selected Mercury
to design and install its customer systems."
With SunRun, homeowners will get solar panels installed for as little as $500,
and then pay a low fixed rate every month for the solar electricity, allowing
them to save money while enjoying clean electricity. The monthly solar payments
for a typical three-or four-bedroom home in New Jersey start at $50 per month.
All SunRun customers receive an annual money-back performance guarantee in
addition to professional-grade monitoring, maintenance, repairs, and insurance,
making it simpler than ever to get clean electricity.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/mercury-solar-systems-partners-with-sunr\
un-to-offer-affordable-home-solar-power-in-new-jersey-82369977.html
____________________________________________________________________
Solar Power is the Future!
LaMar UTAH USA
www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
Attorney Michael Kelly said the lawsuit has two defendants so far...
Right, and that's equal to "being attacked"?????
And the complaint has NOTHING to do with the Smart Grid per se, just that they
think the new meters aren't accurate.
Seems like a pretty easy thing to check.
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, "solarman" <lamar5292@...> wrote:
>
> Smart grid power rates jumped up 200%
>
> "SAN FRANCISCO -- California's nation-leading attempts to install a smart grid
are being attacked on the front and back ends by consumer-protection advocates
who say they are not technically or economically sound.
>
> A lawsuit from customers saying their rates have shot up 200 percent since the
smart meters were installed, as well as a new California law preventing dynamic
pricing, is evidence of weakened consumer confidence in a policy hailed by
utilities and lawmakers as a major solution to climate change and tight energy
supplies."
> http://www.eenews.net/public/climatewire/2009/11/13/3
>
> Time to go off grid people!
>
> LaMar UTAH USA
> www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
>
2nd Correction.
While the math this time was correct, I used the wrong units.
2 MW X 24 hrs = 48 MW HOURS per day, or MWh.
> 48 MWh X 365 days = 17,520 MWh per year (Max MWh possible)
> 17,520 MWh X .30 = 5,256 MWh per year (Typical MWh produced)
>
> (thanks to Dot Sulock at UNC for again pointing out my use of incorrect
terminology)
Arthur
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, "adoucette" <adoucette@...> wrote:
>
> Correction
>
> The math is quite well understood.
> I on the otherhand can't multiply worth a damn.
>
> 2 MW X 24 hrs = 48 MWs per day
> 48 MW X 365 days = 17,520 MW per year (Max MW possible)
> 17,520 MW X .30 = 5,256 MW per year (Typical MW produced)
>
> (thanks to Dot Sulock at UNC for pointing out my error)
>
> Arthur
>
> --- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, "adoucette" <adoucette@> wrote:
> >
> > The math is quite well understood.
> > For good wind sites, modern turbines will produce a bit less than 30% of
rated capacity. In other words a 2 MW turbine could theoreticaly produce 48 MWs
per day = 8,760 MWs per year, but will actually produce about 2,500 MWs. For
most windsites the turbines will also produce a higher percent of that power in
the Spring and Fall (our seasons with the highest average wind speed)
> >
> > This is all taken into account when the Wind farms are built. They know
pretty well how much power they will get and about when they will get it, but
that weather on any given day is the deciding factor on how much we actually
get.
> >
> > Solar is EXACTLY the same, we have excellent long term Solar Insolation maps
which tell us how much sun a given location is going to AVERAGE over the year,
and we know we get nothing when the sun is not up and we get the higher percent
of power from April to September but that weather on any given day is the
deciding factor on how much we actually get. This is all taken into account when
Solar installations are evaluated.
> >
> > What's the good news?
> >
> > A MIX of both Solar and Wind produces fewer times when neither are producing
power. An extensive Solar and Wind system with say natural and pumped hydro
storage, a 20% Nuclear Base load capacity and then distributed back up gas
turbine generators for handling peak loads and equipment outages might be all we
need.
> >
> > Arthur
> >
> > --- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, OffGridSolar@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Why does the wind farm people tout the math of generating electric power?
I
> > > have never seen a wind farm without at least 2-5 wind generators not
> > > working at all. Yet they still make claims of 845 MW of available power.
Most
> > > wind farms have 7% to 8% of the wind mills not working. If you have 335
wind
> > > mills installed this means that over 23 units are not working for the 7%.
> > > For the 8% this means that 27 units are not working. The same holds true
for
> > > clouds on solar farms. Does anyone know why this is the math that they
> > > claim is acceptable? To me it is like being a elected official, in other
words
> > > no one knows the truth. I support renewable energy but lets try to be
> > > honest about the math.
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
There is no war on words!
I post links to respected news sources and Ard changed the quote to support his
own opinion- that is unethical!
If he disagrees with the quote he can state his own opinion or better yet
provide a link to information that supports his claim.
So far I see lots of opinions and very few links to support those opinions.
I have opinions to, but my opinions are based on research and I provide the
links to support those opinions!
LaMar UTAH USA
www.simplesolarhomesteading.com
--- In renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com, OffGridSolar@... wrote:
>
> Ok, enough with the war on words. Electric cars! Great way to transport
> just about anything using stored electric energy (batteries) auto charging
> stations (Keep em-moving) another great answer to the problem. I found only
> one small flaw. Road Taxes. In the USA we pay 51 cents a gallon in road tax
> use per gallon. How long do we think that this for the Federal
> Transportation Department will let this go? So what we still have to pay
taxes for gas
> or electric. I just looked at my home's electric bill. Guess what. State,
> Federal and County taxes are applied. How does this tax benefit the DOT. It
> does not! So we still push EV's as the best solution. Has anyone ever
> thought of transmitting electric power from antenna to antenna. Now the range
> problem is solved, the road use tax is also solved and the DOT will be happy.
> When ever I look at applications for renewable energy I always look at how
> we can make things better. EV the best solution for carbon along with a
> better way to drive. I guess what I am referring to is Thomas Edison was
right
> but it took us many years to realize facts. DC is better than AC. This
> will start a war again in Energy. But who cares we war for all the wrong
> reasons.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
http://www.sunelec.com has cheap panels, $0.98 / watt
You can find some good DIY resources on our website.
Steve Spence
Renewable energy and self sufficiency
http://www.green-trust.orghttp://makingthewebwork.blogspot.com/
Paul C wrote:
>
>
> Steve, can you point me to affordable sources to purchase PV panels, and/or
> good instructions on how to make them yourself?
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Steve Spence <steve@...
> <mailto:steve%40green-trust.org>> wrote:
>
>> Easy solution. Don't put them on the roof, and stay with a low voltage
>> system. Any one who has ever put a tv antenna on a roof, or shingled
>> one, can handle the roof aspects, and if you have ever played with model
>> trains or wired a light switch, you can handle the electrical parts
>> without electrocuting yourself. We have been teaching folks to install
>> their own solar before there were "certified" solar installers. That's a
>> fairly new phenomena.
>>
>>
>> Steve Spence
>> Renewable energy and self sufficiency
>> http://www.green-trust.org <http://www.green-trust.org>
>> http://makingthewebwork.blogspot.com/
> <http://makingthewebwork.blogspot.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> OffGridSolar@... <mailto:OffGridSolar%40aol.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Lowe's. I would never recommend anyone trying to install solar at all.
>> You
>> > can kill yourself by two ways. 1. Fall off the roof. 2. Electrocute
>> > yourself. Again stupid information. I would not expect anyone to
>> > understand that
>> > there are qualified installers of solar products. I am not a licensed
>> solar
>> > installer. But I know they are qualified to install solar PV. You are
>> just
>> > asking for trouble; doing this yourself.
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> ==========================================================
>> THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
>> the American Wind Energy Association:
>> http://www.awea.org <http://www.awea.org>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
300 MPG Car? I bet you no one can prove that claim. Hydrogen! Well lets
look at hydrogen in a math format. Water is made of 2 parts hydrogen and one
part air. Now that means that for every gallon of water you get 2/3 of a
gallon of hydrogen. 2/3 of a gallon to go 300 miles? Something is very wrong.
Friction must come into play. I will go out on a limb and say BS. It can
not be done. It is a con or a scam.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Offline 
Send Email
