BS: Alternative energy sources

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,BanjoRay
Date: 01 Aug 09 - 09:04 AM

Maybe the reason no other intelligent species has yet been detected in the universe is because when one's been around for a million years it gets intelligent enough to develop, and get addicted to, it's own extinction technology. Maybe some time a species will go a little further and avoid become extinct, but I don't expect that'll be ours...
Oh dear
Ray

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: EBarnacle
Date: 31 Jul 09 - 05:06 PM

Bate's methane generator was nothing new, even when he introduced it. Similar generators were used in both the United Kingdom and Europe due to shortages of petroleum for civilian use.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 09 - 03:54 PM

"In the developed world, domestic energy consumption per household runs in excess of 2,000 kg of oil equivalent. Some of this consumption can be offset, with a consequent reduction in energy bills, by the use of renewable energy. Geothermal and solar energy can be used for space heating and heating water, while solar photovoltaic systems and micro-wind turbines can be used to generate electricity. Some environmentally aware householders are switching to providers who supply energy derived from renewable sources such as hydro, tidal, wave, and large-scale wind turbine installations, while others are resorting to microgeneration.

In 2004, only 0.5% of energy used in homes was from renewable sources, which includes energy from waste. Clearly, there is significant scope for increasing the use of this largely untapped resource. The high cost of installing renewable energy systems and the long payback times remain a barrier to the widespread adoption of microgeneration technology. However, as more householders install systems, the renewable energy sector will achieve scale, and the cost of equipment will eventually fall to the point where microgenerated energy is competitive with that produced by burning fossil fuel.

There are a number of practical issues regarding the installation of wind, solar and geothermal technologies in housing. The distributed energy generation model will impact on the business model of the energy provider and grid operator, while the use of renewable energy within the consumer market will impact the fossil fuel market.

The idea that householders could become energy providers is relatively new and has been picked up on by vendors of equipment and systems that extract energy from renewable sources. Microgeneration fits well with the concept of local energy generation and community based energy products – itself being driven by people and companies who see themselves and NextGen energy producers as being locked in battle with the monopolistic incumbent grid operators and power generators. However, care must be taken that householders are not misled as to what is achievable using current technology and do not expect to earn a significant return on their investment by selling surplus energy back to grid operators." From the Energy Crowd.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: CarolC
Date: 21 May 08 - 03:06 PM

I just heard it mentioned as one small part of a much larger talk. The link to the talk is here...

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=110690&messages=33#2338721

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 21 May 08 - 02:51 PM

I'd like to know how they collect the energy from it.


Any links?

Regards,


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: CarolC
Date: 21 May 08 - 02:23 PM

Some people are experimenting with some kind of solar collecting material that can be sprayed on like paint. I'm curious to see is this can help make surfaces such as the wind turbine towers (and people's roofs) good surfaces for energy collection.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Grab
Date: 21 May 08 - 02:10 PM

I would like to know why it's an either or solution. Why are wind turbine towers not covered with small solar panels?
Why is it, even though they are often very tall towers, they do not use materials for construction, or in addition to construction, that do not take advantage of electrical current induced due to thermal differences across the material? Etc.

Until PV solar panels improve in efficiency, they aren't viable in the UK. In the UK, current numbers are that a solar panel of today's readily-available technology will not recoup its cost, nor its environmental impact (which is considerable), within its lifespan. In Death Valley, things are rather different, of course. :-)

But even then, you're faced with the issue of area covered. Wind turbine towers are tall and thin, of course, which presents a fairly small area for covering with solar panels, and a vertical surface makes a poor sun-catcher anyway. So it really ain't going to work that well. When solar panels get high-efficiency then maybe, but currently-available stuff just won't cut it.

And as for the 1 microvolt extra - I assume that was a joke, dude? It'd take 11 million 100m-lengths of wire to run one 11W power-saving fluorescent lightbulb. That's the distance to the Moon and back 14 times. That's a lot of wire, mate! :-)

Temperature differences would work if there was a significant difference. But there isn't. Best case, the dry adiabatic lapse rate (rate at which temperature drops with altitude) is 9.8 degC/km. So over a 100m pylon, that's 0.98 degC, which isn't a right lot. A quick search on Wikipedia about thermoelectrics suggests you'd get 40 microwatts from a 5 degC temperature gradient, hence 8 microwatts from a 1 degC temperature gradient. It's an improvement on the long wire though - only 275,000 towers needed to run one 11W fluorescent lightbulb.

Re the steam from power generation, cooling towers are used to preserve the water - but the heat is indeed wasted. That's the idea behind CHP (Combined Heat and Power) schemes which are rather popular in the Third World. They haven't really been picked up in the West though, because (a) it's generally too hard to get the hot water to homes efficiently and reliably, and (b) most places don't need much heating for six months of the year. I believe they're moderately popular in places like Alaska though, where there's a year-round need for significant amounts of heating, and individual towns often make their own arrangements for power instead of relying on the national grid.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 21 May 08 - 10:56 AM

A SWAG, in American engineering circles, is a Shitty-Wild-Assed-Guess. It is a semi-mathematical method for approximating solutions to engineering problems when the variables are too complex or to unknown for a more rigorous method to be applied.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Paul Burke
Date: 21 May 08 - 07:13 AM

Little generators are a poor option, unless there's no other power available, like on a boat. The engineering investment is huge compared to the energy output. One big problem is that the rated wind speed is very high for most locations; this one is 12.5m/s which is 28mph. The relationship between wind speed and power output is cubic, so most of the time it operates at a fairly small fraction of its rating. For example, averaging the 5 day forecast for here, I get 18mph- and hence an average power output of not 1KW but 270W.

I believe that these solutions are aimed mainly not at converting wind into energy, but good intentions into profits.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 21 May 08 - 06:51 AM

This was an aricle that put me on to the 'Future energy' website:



'The ethical shopper

Dominic Murphy
Tuesday June 27, 2006
The Guardian


One problem with domestic wind turbines is you need a decent breeze for them to work. This new one, however, claims to generate electricity at lower wind speeds than competitors, because it has five blades instead of the usual three. If this isn't tempting enough, the £695 price tag should blow you away. Don't be fooled, however. For this kind of money, you will have to install the thing yourself and you won't be able to connect it to mains electricity. Should you want it connected to the meter, you must buy a "grid-tie inverter", which will set you back another £600 or more. You will also need an accredited installer to do it for you. In other words, there won't be much change from £2,000 - pretty much the cost of getting a rival turbine up and running. From Future Energy, 08700 664100, http://www.futurenergy.co.uk/. '

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 21 May 08 - 06:42 AM

This looks quite a good wind turbine with 5 blades for better efficiency:

            
HOME PRODUCTS ENERGY CHALLENGE LINKS FAQ'S CONTACT
            



FuturEnergy 1KW Upwind Turbine

Our New 'rugged' Upwind Turbine range is based on 2 years of real-life testing and development in Warwickshire and the Uplands of Scotland.

Using our unique Permanent Magnet Generators, combined with our Hi-Spec Wind Turbine Blade Sets, these furling turbines create very useful power in low wind conditions, and over 1000W in winds of 12.5m/s.

Available in 12V, 24V, 36V & 48V DC versions, they are suitable for battery charging, water/air heating and Grid-Tie installations.

We don't recommend, nor will we authorise the installation of any of our turbines in 'building-mounted' installations, other than for steel-framed and other industrial buildings. These turbines are tower-top ready, and will fit on to any of our Tower Kits listed here. These can be purchased separately, and can be made to your specific requirements where feasible. All FuturEnergy Wind Turbines must be installed using our approved towers. Distributors and Re-Sellers based in the UK must also use only those towers approved for use with our turbines. Please order your tower kit when ordering your turbine, since there is usually a 3-5 week lead time on all towers. For a complete guide to towers, system designs and grid-tied inverters, see this Turbine Guide

Your turbine will be supplied in 2 shipping containers, weighing a total of 30Kg, and you will be required to attach the tailfin and blades to the main turbine housing. All instructions will be supplied to guide you through the simple assembly, and you should be ready to mount and use your turbine in only a few hours. For battery charging applications we suggest that you use a suitable charge controller to prevent your batteries from becoming overcharged.

• Mechanically furling tail fin for high wind protection
• Unique high-spec Permanent Magnet Generator
• 5 top-grade glass filled nylon turbine blades
• Sealed bearings in mast-mounting shaft
• 60 Amp rated slip-ring prevents cable-twisting
• Aerodynamic profile design
• Patented anti-vibration locking washers
• Rugged and simple, with a minimum of parts and simplicity of design
• Zinc-plated and Stainless Steel with powder-coated and anodised aluminium for optimal corrosion and weather resistance
• Manufactured in the UK


Technical Specifications
Downloads

Nominal Power Output - 1000W (600W / 12v Version)
Start-Up Wind Speed - 2.5m/s
Cut-In Wind Speed - 3.2m/s
Rated Wind Speed - 12.5m/s
Survival Wind Speed - 50m/s
Rotor Diameter - 1.8m
Number of Blades - 5
Generator Type - 3-Phase Perm Magnet (this is rectified to DC inside the turbine, giving a 2-wire DC output)
Weight - 22Kg
Suitable Tower Diameter - 50mm
Noise: LAeq 35dB @ 5m/s @ 5m behind rotor
Noise: LAeq 54dB @ 7m/s @ 5m behind rotor
ROHS compliant
FE1012U 12V Turbine Spec + Power Curve
FE1024U 24V Turbine Spec + Power Curve
FE1036U 36V Turbine Spec + Power Curve
FE1048U 48V Turbine Spec + Power Curve
Tower Kits and Turbine Guide
Buy Now - £695 inc VAT (£591.49 Ex VAT)
P&P on this item within UK - £28.50 inc VAT

Trade Prices upon application

Installer Training Courses now available.




Permanent Magnet Generators

At the heart of our 1KW Turbines is this Permanent Magnet Generator. Using the very latest in rare earth magnets we are able to produce very high power outputs at low RPM levels, while achieving this from a PMG weighing only 7Kg. With a wide variety of uses, from wind and water turbines, to fuel-powered generators, we are offering these PMG's to anyone who wishes to adapt them into their own products.

Supplied with 3-Phase power output cables (approx 15cm in length), 18mm axle securing nut and washer, and 5 x 8mm nuts, washers and split rings on the faceplate mounting bolts. You will need to rectify the output of the 3-phases to produce DC for battery charging and other applications. Our PMG's are not guaranteed for use with your own rectifier solutions, and so we can supply a 3-Phase Bridge Rectifier Kit for this item for around £16.20 inc VAT, please ask when ordering.


For a technical spec, click here Buy Now - £150 inc VAT (£127.66 Ex VAT)
P&P on this item within UK- £18.50 inc VAT

   

   
   

Grid-Tie Inverter
The SunnyBoy 1100LV inverter provides an ideal way to connect your FuturEnergy turbine to the 'mains' supply in your house/business. This inverter has a 'turbine' mode which we will program for you when you order your inverter, to match the performance of the turbine model you plan to use. The power from your turbine is converted into high quality 240VAC and is synchronised with the utility supply in your house. Any power you use will come mainly from your own turbine (when in operation) in preference to the mains, which basically means that you will use less power from the national grid than would otherwise be the case. During most of the day, even in windy conditions, you will be using more power in your home than your turbine is producing, and hence you will rarely be 'exporting' any power on to the grid. It is unlikely that you will benefit from trying to sell power back to the grid, since you will require an 'import/export' meter to be installed, and you will consume almost all the power you produce yourself through the products that you have permanently switched on in your home. This inverter needs to be connected directly to your consumer unit, to a separate fuse, rated at 16A, with a 16A double pole isolation switch (lockable) connected in accordance with UK wiring regulations. A qualified electrician, or FuturEnergy Installer will be able to carry out this for you.

This inverter is suitable for use with either the FE1024 or FE1048 turbine, and you will require a Dedicated FuturEnergy Charge Controller with 2 dump loads (shown below) to protect the inverter mainly during power cut situations. We no longer recommend using the Xantrex charge controllers with this Inverter since it does not offer all the protection required during some operating modes. Please ask for details of the Charge Controller required when ordering the Inverter

Buy Now - SunnyBoy 1100LV - £1150 inc VAT (£978.72 Ex VAT)

P&P on this item within UK - £28.50 inc VAT

   

   

Xantrex C40 & C60 Charge Controllers

For use in Battery-Based systems, these rugged charge controllers offer protection against overcharging when used with our wind turbines. The Xantrex C60 is capable of handling charging currents of 60A, and is suitable for use with battery banks of 12V and 24V only. The C40 can handle charging currents of up to 40A, and is suitable for use in 12V, 24V and 48V battery charging applications.

In order to use either of these controllers with your FE Turbine and Battery Bank, you will require a suitable dump load for connection to the C40 or C60. These dump loads are shown below, and can be bought separately if required.

The following number of dump loads are required with each of the following battery voltages.

For 12V systems use a C40 or C60 and 2 Dump Loads (in parallel)

For 24V systems use a C40 or C60 and 1 Dump Load

For 48V systems use a C40 and 2 Dump Loads (in series)

Buy Now - Xantrex C60 - £195 inc VAT (£165.96 Ex VAT)

Buy Now - Xantrex C40 - £155 inc VAT (£131.92 Ex VAT)

P&P on this item within UK - please ask when ordering

      

   

Dump Loads

For use with either of the Xantrex charge controllers above, these dump loads are effectively very high power air heating elements. The C40 and C60 charge controllers are used in 'Load Diversion' mode, and as such, they dissipate any unwanted power into these dump loads when your battery bank becomes fully charged. It is vital to use a charge controller to prevent damage to your batteries, especially if you leave your system unattended for long periods of time, and without loading your batteries with an inverter, or other suitable device.

These dump loads should be mounted as close as possible to your C40 or C60 charge controller. They should be mounted in free circulating air, and not in an enclosed space. The power connection blocks are made of solid brass, and all cabling used should be securely connected using the bolts provided. Please ensure that you choose the correct number of dump loads for the battery bank voltage you are charging. See above for details.

Buy Now - Dump Load - £80 inc VAT (£68.09 Ex VAT)

P&P on this item within UK - please ask when ordering

      




Wind Turbine Blade Sets
These wind turbine blade sets are constructed to the highest of standards, and are used at the heart of our 1KW downwind range. They can easily be adapted to suit other turbines, and will produce up to 1.2kW of power in 12.5m/s winds. The blade set comes in kit form, including 5 x high-spec blades, manufactured in black PAG material (virtually indestructible, and don't require painting), with 2 x 5-blade hubs (black anodised finish) and location pitch pins (25 degree root angle). Once assembled, the complete rotor, measuring 1800mm in diameter, can be adapted to suit many power generators, and will perform best in the 300 to 900 RPM range. The hub is supplied with enough nuts & bolts to assemble the complete rotor, and has 5 mounting holes, each of 6mm in diameter, positioned in a pentagon shape at a PCD of 90mm. The main boss hole in the hub has a diameter of 74.6mm, and care should be taken to accurately, securely and centrally mount the completed rotor on to your intended application.

In order to achieve the best results from these blades, the final rotor assembly should be balanced by the user prior to being used in any application. Neither FuturEnergy Ltd nor the blade manufacturers accept any responsibility for any issues arising from unbalanced rotors in any application. Each blade set will be supplied with instructions on how to perform a 'static balance' of the assembled rotor, and it is the user's responsibility to ensure that every effort has been made to address any balancing issues prior to using these blades.      

      
    Buy Now - £170 inc VAT (£144.68 Ex VAT)
P&P on this item within UK- £18.50 in VAT

      




High-Power Cable
For use with our turbines and PMG's, this cable is very flexible, High-Power with a 10sq mm conductor area (8 AWG), available in Red or Black. Ideal for connecting the DC power output from our turbines, down your tower to your batteries, charge controller, heating element or inverter. Also good for making your battery bus bar connections. The cable is sold per meter, and has the following specifications...

Single core PVC insulated High-Power cable, ideal for use with wind turbines, batteries, power interconnections, charge controllers and heating element connections
Each cable contains 80 x 0.4sq mm plain annealed copper conductors with heat resisting PVC insulation rated up to +105 oC
UL, AWM, CSA, TEW, BS6231 and SEMCO recognised
Maximum working voltage: 600 Volts
10sq mm overall conductor area, suitable for currents up to 75A
Volt drop of only 2.2mV/A/m
Weight 1.2Kg per 10m

      
    Buy Now - RED or BLACK - £3.50 per meter inc VAT
Postage price dependent on length ordered

      



Portable USB solar Charger
For use with your own USB charger cables, or with our optional Connectivity Packs, this USB solar charger will provide power for your Phone, PDA, GameBoy or MP3 player while on-the-move or on the beach!!.

Constructed in High Impact ABS and using the very latest in Solar Cell Technology, this pocket USB solar charger has Built-In NiMH batteries to absorb power in all lighting conditions. Simply connect your USB power cable to the integrated USB socket and connect your Phone, PDA or other electronic device to initiate charging. The integral power store within the Solar Charger will give you power, even in the dark, with enough energy stored to boost the charge in your Phone, even in the absence of sunlight.

Ideal for use outdoors, on the beach or anywhere that you won't have access to 'mains' electricity....free yourself from power adapters and car chargers...

      
For further information click here   Buy Now - £34.95 inc VAT
P&P on this item within UK- £2.95 in VAT

      
      
©FuturEnergy Ltd 2005, FuturEnergy Ltd, A Subsidiary of Special EFX Ltd, 7 Ettington Park Business Centre, Stratford Upon Avon, Warwickshire, CV37 8BT

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Paul Burke
Date: 21 May 08 - 03:24 AM

SWAGs? Sailors' wives and girlfriends?

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 May 08 - 01:08 AM

"A 100 foot wire in a horizontal configuation will pick up something like 1 microwatt."

This has been known to hobbyists for ages - and a great many small projects written about.

Amos - Ultracapacitors - There was an article in the Aussie electronics Mag Silicon Chip in April 2008 issue.

In teh US, there are teh Coleman Flash Cell Screwdriver and Superior Tool Co Ultracut Cordless Tube Cutter.

Example a 2.5 kF yep that's not a typo... Also up to 50 F - at 5V - they work because the 'plates' are so close, but the voltage rating is only a few volts - so you connect large numbers in series to handle the needed voltage.

Honda have one bank that is paired with their hydrogen fuel cell.

The article talks about using them in cars - and pairing with lead acid cells. Discussions about just how fast you can charge banks of them in a few minutes without melting the house power feed too!

They are much better peak power sources than batteries of any type - deeper discharge rates and less heat dissapitation. 100,000 to 1 million cycles. Guarantee 10 years life - better than batteries. Less space and lighter for same power capacity than batteries. One quarter of the theoretical max capacitance of the chemistry involved.

Lots of vapourware, but EEstor is a real company.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 20 May 08 - 08:57 PM

Sure--it's something they should have. The cost f collecting the small increments might not be viable, is what I would guess.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 20 May 08 - 08:55 PM

A 100 foot wire in a horizontal configuation will pick up something like 1 microwatt. With most towers standing that high I'm sure there would be additional voltage. Not much mind, but a small amount. It's not that it's a huge amount but every little bit! But what about the towers being covered with solar cells? It's not like they would take up more space than the tower's skin already does. I'm not sure how much it might add but with 100 towers...

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 20 May 08 - 08:41 PM

Chief:

So far, cost-efficiency requires an energy density factor much higher than ambinet thermal gradients. Another generation of nano-scale engineering will probably overcome this and we should be able to micro-scavenge using sensor built into wall and roof tiles from ambient thermal, air, sound, static charge and mechanical vibration, using microscopic cells and accumulators like large capacitors that look something like steel-wool -- miles and miles of capacitative surfaces in a very small area.

But we have to bring the cost of design and production (and repair or replacement) down to be able to take advantage of such sporadic and low-density energy events.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,Chief Chaos
Date: 20 May 08 - 06:03 PM

I would like to know why it's an either or solution. Why are wind turbine towers not covered with small solar panels?
Why is it, even though they are often very tall towers, they do not use materials for construction, or in addition to construction, that do not take advantage of electrical current induced due to thermal differences across the material? Etc.

Although I believ that conservation is probably going to have the highest impact on resources (at this point) I know that it is not the whole answer. Continued population growth will cause icreased demand either requiring more of the pollution causing plants or the development of the technologies we're discussing.

I do know of one great waste that does need to be addressed. Many power generating plants just let the steam produced go up the stack and dissipate into the atmosphere. It could easily be used to preheat the incoming water supply, thus requiring less expenditure to boil the incoming flow. If it were then gathered and condensed at a higher location it could be run through a generator much like any other hydroelectric plant. The water, if filtered, would be a great source of clean drinking water, something we also seem to be having problems with.

Does anyone know if there has been any research (as of late) to harness lightning strikes or induced current in the polar regions?

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 20 May 08 - 10:40 AM

I love SWAGS with numbers in them. Thanks, Paul!!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Paul Burke
Date: 20 May 08 - 09:06 AM

I'm not in favour of "someone says" estimates... let's try and work it out. According to Wikipedia, it's at about 36 degrees north and has an area of about 7800 square kilometres- 7.8G sq m. If we assume that the daylight averages out as a rough half- sinusoid, the average is about 1/pi times the peak. The solar constant is about 1.4kW per square metre, so the average power per square metre is 1.4cos(36)/pi = 0.36kW/sq metre. That gives about 2800GW average for the whole valley, or about 25 million GWHr annual production. Back to Wikipedia, that has an estimate of 17 million GWHr consumption in the USA in 2005.

Yes, it looks right.. if you cover the whole valley, and conversion efficiency is over 68%.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Charley Noble
Date: 20 May 08 - 07:48 AM

If we could only harness the energy generated by our two cats, we could power everything in our household and make a tidy profit with the surplus sent back to the power company grid.

Of course, I'm neglecting to factor in such variables as downtime for hairballs, litterbox runs, grooming, and naps.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 May 08 - 11:44 PM

"There's enough solar and thermal energy in Death Valley alone to power the United States year 'round, I have read somewhere, but for good reason no-one has ever built a HV distribution backbone into the area. So it would be costly to get the energy out to the grid."

Ah - the grid was built to go to Niagara - more or less... so if we HAD gone the thermal path, the grid would have gone there... you heard the old tale how winding goat tracks become winding highways?

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 19 May 08 - 07:09 PM

THere are places where you can buy an individual windmill.

A Sterling-engine generator is a possibility. They depend on a difference in temperature, so it depends how much you could heat up a fluid using solar-thermal. I've powered all my hot water and forced-air heating by thermal-solar and found it reduced my energy bill by about thirty percent. (That was just sun-heated water pumped into the hot water tank and used to heat the duct-air). But it depends on how much sun.

So I would say your first order of business is to learn what an average year of sun and of wind means in your locale.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 19 May 08 - 06:48 PM

I'm interested to know what's viable to try out on an individual basis in the UK on a convex north facing slope with about 1/2 acre to play with.
Any ideas?

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 19 May 08 - 12:40 PM

That's why we have a grid to distribute Niagara's energy, isn't it?

Obviously some places are less suitable for wind scavenging than others.

There's enough solar and thermal energy in Death Valley alone to power the United States year 'round, I have read somewhere, but for good reason no-one has ever byuilt a HV distribution backbone into the area. So it would be costly to get the energy out to the grid. I would be willing to bet, for example, that even without PV, there is enough thermal difference between the surface and, say, 30 feet below it, to make a Sterling engine highly efficient and viable as a generating source.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 May 08 - 11:09 AM

Viability is directly dependent on wind direction and consistancy. Each area would have to be looked at: Any specific area may or may not be viable.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 19 May 08 - 11:03 AM

I think that's fair Bruce. From a seat-of-the-pants estimate I don't see that the manufacturing and operations impacts you mention would be out of proportion among wind, coal-burning, and nuclear generation. Windmills do not generate CO2, and although some have been cited as hazards to birds that can be circumvented and has been by design improvements. End-of-life disposal is certainly no greater a cost for a windmill than it is for a traditional fuel-burning generation plant.

I haven't seen a spreadsheet of these factors broken down, so I am SWAGGING it.

I don't think these factors are sufficient to support ake's claim of "economically unviable" for wind generation.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 May 08 - 10:18 AM

Amos,

In general I agree with you ( on this) It is always possible to store energy by using excess to pump water to an elevated location ( water towr or resevoir in the mountains) and use turbines to recover ( most ) of the energy when it is needed.

HOWEVER, you state "Once the capital investment is made the cost of production is maintenance only."

You ALSO have to factor in

1. the environmental impact of the manufacturing process ( very high for solar power)
2. The environmental impact of operations (CO2, acid rain, hazards to birds, etc)
3. The cost and environmental impact of disposal at end of life.

ALL of these add to the true cost- and should be considered for any energy source ( INCLUDING oil, gas, coal, nuclear, hydroelectric, geothermal, tidal, solar, and wind.)

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 19 May 08 - 10:08 AM

AKe:

Not economically viable?

I'd like to see hard numbers in support of that.

The variability of winds is taken into account when they select sites. There are six different ways to accomodate the variability using storage capacity. Capacitative devices, flywheels, thermal storage, batteries, ggracity lift mechanisms, and mechanical storage, such as by clockwork, come tom ind right off the top of my head.

Once the capital investment is made the cost of production is maintenance only. Free product.

How do you figure this is not economically viable?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Mr Happy
Date: 19 May 08 - 08:31 AM

Lots've people who live on narrow boats use wind turbines + solar panels to keep their batteries charged & are also able to run plenty've domestic devices from these free, clean, green sources

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,Jim Martin
Date: 19 May 08 - 07:43 AM

Surely it would be a lot more sensible for people to install their own wind turbines where possible?

This would avoid the problems with the effect on the environment and landscape value, I believe that 70% of the current is lost in national grid systems anyway so how efficient is that?

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: CarolC
Date: 19 May 08 - 01:24 AM

They are not economically viable, depend on variable wind conditions and massive govt subsidies to construct and maintain.
UK Capitalists are now meassing behind Nuclear Power with all its poisonous consequences.

Nuclear power is not economically viable, either, and it depends on massive government subsidies as well, but they never bother to mention that. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: MarkS
Date: 19 May 08 - 12:23 AM

Wind generators are today at a point where they are efficient and reliable. As the state of the art improves, we can forsee in years to come they will get even better.
Suspect they are now at the point where you do not need a tax incentive to install one, because they are economically viable on their own.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 18 May 08 - 05:06 AM

Well, the Rudd Govt has removed the solar panel tax rebate for those on incomes of over $100,000 - most of those who COULD afford the price.

One supplier claims loss of over $1 million sales.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: akenaton
Date: 18 May 08 - 04:57 AM

UK is quietly shelving wind farm plans, after wasting millions of taxpayers money for political expediancy.

They are not economically viable, depend on variable wind conditions and massive govt subsidies to construct and maintain.
UK Capitalists are now meassing behind Nuclear Power with all its poisonous consequences.

The only answer is to cut energy use, but of course that would cause the system to fail, so thats a non- starter.

Humanity has just been handed a death sentence....by the business interests who really rule our world...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 May 08 - 12:26 AM

Billionaire oil man bets on the wind

Boone Pickens to buy land, order turbines next month for $10 billion farm
Reuters
updated 10:20 a.m. CT, Wed., April. 23, 2008

WASHINGTON - Legendary Texas oil man T. Boone Pickens has gone green with a plan to spend $10 billion¹ to build the world's biggest wind farm. But he's not doing it out of generosity — he expects to turn a buck.

The Southern octogenarian's plans are as big as the Texas prairie, where he lives on a ranch with his horses, and entail fundamentally reworking how Americans use energy.

Next month, Pickens' company, Mesa Power, will begin buying land and ordering 2,700 wind turbines that will eventually generate 4,000 megawatts of electricity — the equivalent of building two commercial scale nuclear power plants — enough power for about 1 million homes.
"These are substantial," said Pickens, speaking to students at Georgetown University last week. "They're big."

/quote See more at the link.

¹ T. Boone's personal wealth isn't given in recent sources I've seen, but Forbes puts him at #117 on the "wealthiest" listing. He has some management control of 2 to perhaps 4 billion ($) of other people's money.

Subsequent articles indicate that TBoone has "placed an order" for 677 GE wind turbines (677/2,700 = .25), but I'd bet on there being a favorable "opt out" clause. He has emphatically stated that this whole project is contingent on renewal of the Alternative Energy Tax Credit - which expires sometime about now. It might be suspected that the "big plan" is more of an extortion threat to move renewal of the tax credit (which will benefit other of his ventures) than a serious intent to commit to a massive wind power project, although hopefully at least some lesser wind power venture, or some parts of this one, may spin off the announced plan.

The useful part of the news on TBoone² is that it gives more believable estimates of investment costs, construction costs, and regulatory hurdles than the "Romm Report" Amos linked just above, if you're willing to dig through both. While the full report (pdf 248 pp) cited by Romm has some credible information in it, it is basically a "sales pitch," giving only favorable - and mostly very optimistic - comment of "possibilities." (The pdf does have some quite good description of some details of wind machinery that may be revealing to those who haven't studied in depth, and is worth skimming at least.)

² Unfortunately, the "guts" info on TBoone's venture is scattered through about a half dozen (+) recent "news releases," and is not well presented in the one article linked. Finding them presents some difficulties, because most Google results are to environmental groups who post UNDATED and UNCREDITED reports on Boone activities in the range from 8 to 25 years old (still posted as if new news).

John

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Amos
Date: 17 May 08 - 09:21 PM

Winds of change
The U.S. can greatly boost clean wind power for 2 cents a day. Now all
we need is a president who won't blow the chance.

By Joseph Romm

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/05/17/wind_power/

May 17, 2008 | A stunning new report just issued by the Bush
administration finds that for under 2 cents a day per household,
Americans could get 300 gigawatts of wind by 2030. That would:

¥ Reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation by 25
percent in 2030.
¥ Reduce natural gas use by 11 percent.
¥ Reduce cumulative water consumption associated with electricity
generation by 4 trillion gallons by 2030.
¥ Support roughly 500,000 jobs in the U.S.

The report doesn't mention that this would require adopting policies
the Bush administration opposes. But that's what elections are for.

Wind power is coming of age. In 2007, some 20,000 megawatts of wind
were installed globally, enough to power 6 million homes. Sadly, most
wind power manufacturers are no longer American, thanks to decades of
funding cuts by conservatives. Still, new wind is poised to be a
bigger contributor to U.S. (and global) electricity generation than
new nuclear power in the coming decades. As I have written earlier,
concentrated solar power could be an even bigger power source, and it
can even share power lines with wind.

That means we can realistically envision an electric grid built around
renewables: electricity with no greenhouse gas emissions, no fuel cost
(and no future price volatility) and no radioactive waste. But while
it is poised to happen, and other governments are working hard to
claim market share, America will need a bold president to ensure
leadership in these major job-creating industries of the 21st century.

Like solar thermal, wind energy has a long history. More than 2,000
years ago, simple windmills were used in China to pump water and in
Persia and the Middle East to grind grain. Merchants and returning
veterans of the Crusades introduced windmills to Europe in the 11th
century, where first the Dutch and then the English improved the
design. By the 18th century, more than 10,000 windmills operated in
the Netherlands, where they were used to grind grain, pump water and
saw wood. Ultimately the mills were replaced by steam engines because
they could not compete with the low cost, convenience and reliability
of fossil fuels. In America, windmills were widely used in the West by
the end of the 1800s, providing water for irrigation and electricity
for isolated farmers.

While wind has not been able to compete with large central-station
electric power plants for most of this century, it began to see a
resurgence in the 1970s because of the energy crises and government
support. Those wind turbines, however, were crude derivatives from
airplane propellers and were noisy and inefficient. Over the past
quarter-century, significant aerodynamic improvements in blade design
have largely solved both problems and brought down the cost of
electricity from wind power by 10 percent a year (until recently).
Wind energy can now be captured efficiently over a broad range of wind
speeds and direction. Turbines, now placed where the wind is constant,
have been scaled up from 35 kilowatt models of the early 1980s to 2
megawatts (2,000 kilowatts). Better weather forecasting and computer
modeling allow much more confident predictions of wind availability 24
hours ahead of time.

With major government investments in wind in the 1970s, the U.S. was
poised to be a dominant player in what was clearly going to be one of
the biggest job-creating industries of the next 100 years. As late as
the mid 1980s, we had over 85 percent of the world's global installed
capacity, and U.S. companies possessed the most critical knowledge
about how to develop wind farms cost-effectively.

President Reagan cut the renewable energy budget more than 80 percent
after he took office, and eliminated the wind investment tax credit in
1986. His administration saw wind power, clean energy and energy
conservation as "Jimmy Carter" strategies, and, like most
conservatives, Reagan opposed government-led programs to promote
alternative energy. This was pretty much the death of most of the U.S.
wind industry.

(Salon)

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Leadfingers
Date: 10 Dec 05 - 06:25 AM

AND another 100th !

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Leadfingers
Date: 10 Dec 05 - 06:24 AM

So far the best idea is the Hot Air generated here !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 09 Dec 05 - 09:59 PM

Gee petr, where do you think I got the info? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 09 Dec 05 - 03:35 PM

foolestroupe and mg you might want to read wolfgangs link above

the problem is that palm-oil plantations lead to deforestation
in Malaysia and Indonesia -

and the European govts cant restrict import of palm-oil from those
countries due to habitat destruction that would be a trade violation..

here is a bit of it..

In September, Friends of the Earth published a report about the impact of palm oil production. "Between 1985 and 2000," it found, "the development of oil-palm plantations was responsible for an estimated 87 per cent of deforestation in Malaysia". In Sumatra and Borneo, some 4 million hectares of forest have been converted to palm farms. Now a further 6 million hectares are scheduled for clearance in Malaysia, and 16.5 million in Indonesia.

Almost all the remaining forest is at risk. Even the famous Tanjung Puting national park in Kalimantan is being ripped apart by oil planters. The orangutan is likely to become extinct in the wild. Sumatran rhinos, tigers, gibbons, tapirs, proboscis monkeys and thousands of other species could go the same way. Thousands of indigenous people have been evicted from their lands, and some 500 Indonesians have been tortured when they tried to resist. The forest fires which every so often smother the region in smog are mostly started by the palm growers. The entire region is being turned into a gigantic vegetable oil field.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 09 Dec 05 - 09:03 AM

If all the fish and chip oil in the USA were used for generating biodiesel it would provide about 1/380th of the current fuel usage.

So UKers, we have work to do....


Oh and my previous post was quoting form a source that assumed that oil had ceased, and that we would need an equivalent amount of palm-oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 08 Dec 05 - 07:56 PM

Well, it doesn't have to use allof the rainforest. Palm oil used to be used in cooking, and some people consider it quite healthy. Certainly they should at least be able to use the old plantations or family plots or whatever. There are a lot of places that need to be reforested, including where the rainforest has been cut already. Why not for palm oil...I presume it is some sort of fruit or nut and is a renewable resourcs. Just because you use some doesn't mean it has to provide all of the world's needs. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 08 Dec 05 - 12:53 AM

Came across a writer mentioning that bio-diesel is projected to use 'palm-oil', for the growing of which it will be necessary to destroy most of the rainforest in SE Asia at current rates of fuel usuage.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 05:46 PM

The fire risk in a cement house is just about everything in the house. Anything I list below will burn in a house fire.

carpets
curtains
clothes
furniture
electricals
functional wood- rafters, floor joists, doors etc.

that's just the start.

The external walls may still be standing, but everyone in it can be just as dead of smoke inhalation, assuming the floors and roof haven't fallen in on you as well.


However, for an apartment block, assuming you build with fireproof floors, it is sensible to build in brick/concrete etc. The place where the fire starts still has to get out just as fast , but the neighbours are far safer.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,patmc
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 05:33 PM

In a lot of climates houses need next to no heat. I've seen bananas growing in the Rockies with passive heating- ok the insulation and trick glass required cost a fortune but then it was a prototype.
Equally our personnel vehicles weigh a silly amount- two ton of steel to move lil old me (actually not as lil as I used to be)

Trucking is a real problem- nuclear derived electric trains anyone?

Solar PV- Israelis PV is way over 10 % closer to 30 at last check-

Solar Carnot/stirling cycle - if you have a good 'cold' end these are well over 50 %.

Wind- maybe but the materials science is not there - the new gearbox less gennies are good but the blades still have short lifetimes.

Wave power sucks- the gear gets smashed up and even when it works it leaves deoxygenated water behind it.

Tidal- works but is soooooo expensive. Nice if you already own a fjord though.

biofuel- sounds feasible but for some reason I get an uneasy feeling about it.

As I see it there is going to be a melange of technologies. Nukes will rule until al queda cracks one open.

Oh well back to the day job- looking for oil

Patmc

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 05:00 PM

what is the fire risk of a cement house once the cement has been poured? Of course you have trim etc. and perhaps interior walls..but the structure should be ok, should it not? Do I have to go and set fire to a cement block to find this out? mg

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: robomatic
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 04:05 PM

Uh, there's a fire risk in any construction, and wood is a terrific material when used properly.

Hydrogen is a fuel, and in the US it is mostly derived from natural gas. It is true that burning the hydrogen results in pure water as the result, but stripping the natural gas down to hydrogen (called 'reforming') results in waste emissions, including carbon dioxide.

In addition to the storage problem of hydrogen itself, a vehicle that is powered by hydrogen will not recover kinetic energy by braking unless it has an additional way to store electric energy such as a battery or 'super'capacitor.

And in addition to all that, if you want to heat your vehicle, you'll find that heat cuts way down on your range, because it uses a lot of fuel. The 'advantage' of existing internal combustion engines is that they put out a lot of heat as waste product.

Right now the hybrid vehicles which utilize internal combustion engines run at high efficiency and recover energy of motion during braking represent a high point in efficient energy utilization.

The explosion hazard of hydrogen is over-rated.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: mg
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 03:44 PM

I am in coastal washington state usa where it is one of the few places it might have made sense to build with wood..it was practically considered a weed..some species like alder..and we have earthquakes and it is good for that..and in a coastal climate you don't have the highs and lows. but i now question building with it even here...for social reasons if nothing else...you no longer have a stern matriarch or patriarch capable of controlling the lives of the housemembers..you have unrelated groups of people, you have retirement houses, you have large numbers of people with alzheimers, you have young people living in clusters, and last and worst of all,you have huge numbers of drug users. all of those are factors in fire consideration..plus you have renters..plus you have all sorts of people without enough money so repairs don't get done, appliances are jury-rigged....you have people who smoke in bed and they might be in an apartment next to you. my whole apartment house in the early 70s was in fear of fire although it was brick because a very old woman who had escaped the russian revolution would leave pots on...so even if you personally are totally aware and responsible, your neighbors on meth might not be...i think the fire risk is just too high now..plus there might be some substances that could be cleaned up after meth, flood, mold etc..ceramic maybe? and think if they had had elevated stone or cement houses in new orleans...and all of those twister and hurricane states....why in the world are they still building out of wood there...one of my big questions to ask everyone...no one likes the look of cement block except me, but reinforced it is pretty good for a lot of situations...anyway, if you have a chance, don't live in a wooden apartment house....mg

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: saulgoldie
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 11:23 AM

Where we are going:

Well, the guy who first called our attention to global warming recently said that if we don't do something drastic, the environment will be irreparably harmed, and we will be back to the weather patterns of 1/2 a million years ago. That is to say, warmer and far less predictable according to present models.

The path to a better world involves fewer people each using less energy, and making more effective use of alternative energy sources that do not cause more pollution or add further to warming.

Sad to say (as a US citizen) that my counrty is the biggest offender in this regard, using something like 40% of the world's energy, and declining to sign on with the Kyoto accord, and all that. And we have so effectively marketted our consumerist (energy-wasteful) life-style to the developing countries that they are rapidly becoming a more significant part of the problem. And "leading" us out of this condition is, well, the less said the better.

Nevermind that oil will run out in the very near future. The climate could likely do us in quicker and worser than that eventuality.

Subject: RE: BS: Alternative energy sources
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 07 Dec 05 - 08:07 AM

MG, where are you based? Climate is important

Wood is actually a fairly good insulator. There are reasons not to build in it, but temprature is not it.

Stone houses have a huge thermal mass. If they're not too draughty, they will take a long time to heat up or cool down. Newer ones, with proper thinner masonry are less so but the old ones with 4-6 foot thick rough stone walls might as well be caves. You do need some heating in a cold winter, because the cold does get through the walls eventually. It just takes longer


Any thick, solid walls behave the same way, so concrete, thick brick, stone or adobe are all used in hot climates to keep out the heat of a hot day.