I just wanted to share a story from yesterday — I participated in an all-day stakeholder meeting with a community based renewable energy concern looking raise awareness and pull everyone in and on-line.
The discussion was all predicated on the broader effects on the initial "investment" and it's impact in the community via the Keynesian multipliers effects; and the rigged price of electricity they are trying to sell at and the research they will be performing.
A large component of their project to date is keeping graduate students and their advisors "employed."
I drove back shaking my head; why can't the project be scaled to where it itself is feasible, and let the the broader economic benefits happen? Or am I being too practicable/frugal?
Keynesian Multipliers
IMO renewable energy will only happen on an individual scale. You can't install a coal powered turbine in your back yard, but you can put up a wind generator and/or a solar panel quite easily.
Expecting to get some magical multiplier by selling electricity at unicorn prices is totally ignoring reality :\. Best just to ignore them and find something more productive to do with your time.
Just my 0.02. One other thing, current solar panel tech is pretty much crap. Wind generators are much more efficient currently, and it'll be 10-20 years before solar panels are really worth buying.
Expecting to get some magical multiplier by selling electricity at unicorn prices is totally ignoring reality :\. Best just to ignore them and find something more productive to do with your time.
Just my 0.02. One other thing, current solar panel tech is pretty much crap. Wind generators are much more efficient currently, and it'll be 10-20 years before solar panels are really worth buying.
That depends I think. Solar panels are quite ugly and can completely ruin the flow and spaces of a property (not that most properties have any real spaces anyway these days). A lot of the smaller windmills just look like a weather vane you might see on a farm. In some places that might not work so well, but in others it could easily look like something that belongs.
Also, you can hide a windmill anywhere on the property, but solar panels must be placed in sunny spots which means on the south (often visible) side of the house. That doesn't give you a lot of choices, and often puts them right in the middle of your enjoyable sunny space. You can also get a lot more power from a small wind turbine (multiple kw under high winds) than you can from a solar panel (~120-240W/m^2).
Doing things to boost house value is stupid anyway. We've already seen where that gets you back in 2008, and if you think the economic destruction is over, thing again. Much better to do something that actually provides you value rather than whatever appeases the speculator-consumers. On that note, as far as solar goes solar water heaters can be very efficient and unobtrusive.
Also, you can hide a windmill anywhere on the property, but solar panels must be placed in sunny spots which means on the south (often visible) side of the house. That doesn't give you a lot of choices, and often puts them right in the middle of your enjoyable sunny space. You can also get a lot more power from a small wind turbine (multiple kw under high winds) than you can from a solar panel (~120-240W/m^2).
Doing things to boost house value is stupid anyway. We've already seen where that gets you back in 2008, and if you think the economic destruction is over, thing again. Much better to do something that actually provides you value rather than whatever appeases the speculator-consumers. On that note, as far as solar goes solar water heaters can be very efficient and unobtrusive.
Haplo, I don't know where you live, but you can't hide any windmill on the average property in the Netherlands. Let alone that you would get a permission to place one.
And, the real big windmills are much, much more efficient than the very small ones. Better place 1 single windmill of 100 m (300ft) height then 1000 small 10 m (30ft) heigh windmills.
In general:
-Windmills need (some) maintenance
-No maintenance needed for solar panels, expected life is 25-30 years minimum (the very few first are already operating longer). You can only to expect the transformer need to be replaced after about 15 years.
-Saying solar panels are ugly is subjective, there a different versions, even those fully integrated in the roof.
My personal situation:
-I don't look to often too my roof, so even if I don't like the view of them, I don't care about it.
-I have not installed them to boost house value, but to reduce our electricty bill. One time cost of € 4000,- helped to reduce my electricity bill by about € 45,- / month (will continue for over 30 years, and I won't be hurt by increased electricity prices).
-If I move, I take them with us to our next house or sell them seperately on CL if the new buyer of the house don't want to pay a reasonable price for them.
There are many more details, but I would say that it depends on many factors like geographical location, size of property, local electricity prices etc. if windmills and/or solar panels are a good investment or not. You can't say in general X is not good, Y is better or none of them are good.
And, the real big windmills are much, much more efficient than the very small ones. Better place 1 single windmill of 100 m (300ft) height then 1000 small 10 m (30ft) heigh windmills.
In general:
-Windmills need (some) maintenance
-No maintenance needed for solar panels, expected life is 25-30 years minimum (the very few first are already operating longer). You can only to expect the transformer need to be replaced after about 15 years.
-Saying solar panels are ugly is subjective, there a different versions, even those fully integrated in the roof.
My personal situation:
-I don't look to often too my roof, so even if I don't like the view of them, I don't care about it.
-I have not installed them to boost house value, but to reduce our electricty bill. One time cost of € 4000,- helped to reduce my electricity bill by about € 45,- / month (will continue for over 30 years, and I won't be hurt by increased electricity prices).
-If I move, I take them with us to our next house or sell them seperately on CL if the new buyer of the house don't want to pay a reasonable price for them.
There are many more details, but I would say that it depends on many factors like geographical location, size of property, local electricity prices etc. if windmills and/or solar panels are a good investment or not. You can't say in general X is not good, Y is better or none of them are good.
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
+1 what rube said.
Also, if house entry is on the north side, then the south roof is not in public view.
Having said that, some home locations aren't suitable for either solar or wind power. My future retirement home is one of those... solar gain for only 6 months of the year, when you least need electricity, and located at the bottom of a river valley, so inconsistent & minimal wind energy (but at least the wind sometimes blows in the winter). Anything I install would be of hobby-level rather than provide real benefit.
In my case, installing a wood-fired steam boiler would be more practical...
Also, if house entry is on the north side, then the south roof is not in public view.
Having said that, some home locations aren't suitable for either solar or wind power. My future retirement home is one of those... solar gain for only 6 months of the year, when you least need electricity, and located at the bottom of a river valley, so inconsistent & minimal wind energy (but at least the wind sometimes blows in the winter). Anything I install would be of hobby-level rather than provide real benefit.
In my case, installing a wood-fired steam boiler would be more practical...
Very depressing, Acadien. Shows you why there is such a backlash again renewables in some quarters. Impracticality is never very persuasive.
I'm waiting for the windmill with solar panels on the blades.
I find things like this to be more interesting -- and certainly usable in any environment: http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technol ... rator.html
I'm waiting for the windmill with solar panels on the blades.
I find things like this to be more interesting -- and certainly usable in any environment: http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technol ... rator.html
Wow, thanks for the spirited debate!
At the end of the day, my Friday rant was about a broader issue regarding most of these projects and how they are sold to the sheep. In this case, the community group will get greater than 50¢/kwh for the electricity produced — obviously not market rate provided the technical and business risk posed by this resource. The community group gets a 'rigged' price to sell, and are using their ability to do research on the socio-economic impacts to sell the project to the broader population; should the project be 30 million, times a Keynesian multiplier of 5 or 6, the community will be rich! Brilliant! /sarc
That said, I'm all for NPV > 0 projects regardless if they are solar, wind, biomass, etc. My concern is the project isn't NPV > 0, and the Keynesian multiplier is just fluff to sell it — and I have no qualms is someone puts up a solar panels or wind turbines in their back yard — they are just buying power over a longer period of time on the front end.
At the end of the day, my Friday rant was about a broader issue regarding most of these projects and how they are sold to the sheep. In this case, the community group will get greater than 50¢/kwh for the electricity produced — obviously not market rate provided the technical and business risk posed by this resource. The community group gets a 'rigged' price to sell, and are using their ability to do research on the socio-economic impacts to sell the project to the broader population; should the project be 30 million, times a Keynesian multiplier of 5 or 6, the community will be rich! Brilliant! /sarc
That said, I'm all for NPV > 0 projects regardless if they are solar, wind, biomass, etc. My concern is the project isn't NPV > 0, and the Keynesian multiplier is just fluff to sell it — and I have no qualms is someone puts up a solar panels or wind turbines in their back yard — they are just buying power over a longer period of time on the front end.
@ George: In my case, installing a wood-fired steam boiler would be more practical...
Yes, wood can be a sustainable form of energy also. Actually, this is also a kind of short cycle solar energy. The solar energy is just stored for a couple of years in wood
there are several interesting wood-fired heaters-boilers. I like the idea of rocketstove and the onest hat have a heat exchanger for hot water and/or central heating.
Oil and gas might also be considered the result of solar energy, but because it's based on a looooooong production cycle and the rate we're using these fuels currently is muuuuuuuuch higher, it's not as sustainable as wood.
Yes, wood can be a sustainable form of energy also. Actually, this is also a kind of short cycle solar energy. The solar energy is just stored for a couple of years in wood
there are several interesting wood-fired heaters-boilers. I like the idea of rocketstove and the onest hat have a heat exchanger for hot water and/or central heating.
Oil and gas might also be considered the result of solar energy, but because it's based on a looooooong production cycle and the rate we're using these fuels currently is muuuuuuuuch higher, it's not as sustainable as wood.
Wood is not a sustainable form of energy with our population size. Plus, it's rather dirty. Your neighbors better not be close.
Personal windmills have far far more opposition from communities than personal solar panels. They make noise. Solar panels at worse look a little bad...I guess. Though, that's not a given.
Concerning the initial question, there isn't enough info to make a true decision.
Personal windmills have far far more opposition from communities than personal solar panels. They make noise. Solar panels at worse look a little bad...I guess. Though, that's not a given.
Concerning the initial question, there isn't enough info to make a true decision.
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
> Wood is not a sustainable form of energy with
> our population size. Plus, it's rather dirty.
100% agreement. I already have mixed feelings about using wood to heat with.
The only reason I'd consider using it to run a steam boiler for standby power generation is that there is a substantial local supply of trees and we're already using a pair of woodstoves, so the fuel is already stored onsite.
> Your neighbors better not be close.
They're not. From that house, one can see the three adjacent neighbors' homes and the other side of the river belongs to a timber company. There are three more neighbors across the highway. That's everyone within 1/4 mile!
> our population size. Plus, it's rather dirty.
100% agreement. I already have mixed feelings about using wood to heat with.
The only reason I'd consider using it to run a steam boiler for standby power generation is that there is a substantial local supply of trees and we're already using a pair of woodstoves, so the fuel is already stored onsite.
> Your neighbors better not be close.
They're not. From that house, one can see the three adjacent neighbors' homes and the other side of the river belongs to a timber company. There are three more neighbors across the highway. That's everyone within 1/4 mile!
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
> @George, just thinking... how about micro hydro?
Not enough head in my 350' of riverfront to make it work. A drop of at least 25' is required (50' is good) and the river only drops 10' at most.
Also, since it's a federally-controlled river with wild coho salmon, there's no way in hell that a dam could be built.
Not enough head in my 350' of riverfront to make it work. A drop of at least 25' is required (50' is good) and the river only drops 10' at most.
Also, since it's a federally-controlled river with wild coho salmon, there's no way in hell that a dam could be built.
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
> Rocket stoves do clean combustion and have a
> much smaller wood consumption.
Clean is relative. You still wouldn't want to breathe the exhaust
It should be noted that burning wood releases no more carbon to the atmosphere than if it rotted on the forest floor. However, the carbon is released at a rate far faster than rotting, so we're not doing our atmosphere any favors by burning wood.
How much faster is burning compared to rotting? I can point to a tree stump across the river... that tree was felled back in the days when logging was done by cutting a notch into the trunk and wedging a plank into place for two men to stand on so they could use a two-man hand saw (<1930)! That stump will need at least another century before it crumbles into a pile which is still recognizeable as wood and another century beyond that before it decomposes into soil. The wood that massive stump contains would probably heat my house for only 2 months in the winter.
> much smaller wood consumption.
Clean is relative. You still wouldn't want to breathe the exhaust
It should be noted that burning wood releases no more carbon to the atmosphere than if it rotted on the forest floor. However, the carbon is released at a rate far faster than rotting, so we're not doing our atmosphere any favors by burning wood.
How much faster is burning compared to rotting? I can point to a tree stump across the river... that tree was felled back in the days when logging was done by cutting a notch into the trunk and wedging a plank into place for two men to stand on so they could use a two-man hand saw (<1930)! That stump will need at least another century before it crumbles into a pile which is still recognizeable as wood and another century beyond that before it decomposes into soil. The wood that massive stump contains would probably heat my house for only 2 months in the winter.
-
George the original one
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
I believe the diameter of a helical turbine will be the determining factor of how much power you can get out of it. My river (it's really a glorified creek) does not have much depth... deepest hole along my property is only 3' in summer, maybe 5' in winter.
I also suspect that any small turbine you put in my river will be wiped out when it's clobbered by a couple tons of log floating downstream in the winter floods.
I also suspect that any small turbine you put in my river will be wiped out when it's clobbered by a couple tons of log floating downstream in the winter floods.
A little thinking out of the creek:
Make a bypass, and dig a small pond on your own grounds. Then from the lower side you make a tube, and put a small turbine in it. Lead the tube back to the creek. Done!
( A nice workout too, I suppose, so you get rid of some body-weight and free electricity)
Does that fit?
Make a bypass, and dig a small pond on your own grounds. Then from the lower side you make a tube, and put a small turbine in it. Lead the tube back to the creek. Done!
( A nice workout too, I suppose, so you get rid of some body-weight and free electricity)
Does that fit?
"However, the carbon is released at a rate far faster than rotting, so we're not doing our atmosphere any favors by burning wood."
That is of course depending on the rate of use. If you use yearly only an amount of wood that has grown in that same year (other trees) it's a zero game to my understanding.
Apart from that: the greenest energy, is energy not being used.
Rule to use less energy:
1: reduce
2: then reuse (recycle, e.g. with heat exchangers)
3: produce the needed energy
That is of course depending on the rate of use. If you use yearly only an amount of wood that has grown in that same year (other trees) it's a zero game to my understanding.
Apart from that: the greenest energy, is energy not being used.
Rule to use less energy:
1: reduce
2: then reuse (recycle, e.g. with heat exchangers)
3: produce the needed energy