Renewable Generation
The Problem: Today’s power sector emits large quantities of greenhouse gases and relies heavily on carbon-based fuels with volatile and rising prices. The current system is unsustainable, both economically and environmentally. Electricity generation accounts for approximately one-third of America’s global warming pollution. Scientists urgently warn such pollution must be sharply reduced to avert the most serious consequences of climate change. Meanwhile, viable, non-polluting generation alternatives exist to deliver reliable, cost-effective power to meet America’s needs.
The Solution: Generate 100% of US electricity from truly clean carbon-free sources. Renewable energy generation technologies like solar thermal, photovoltaics, wind, geothermal and biomass have been adding clean, reliable power to the grid for more than a decade. This includes solar and geothermal plants in the southwest, biomass in the northeast and southeast, and wind farms through the Midwest corridor. It is now time to dramatically ramp-up the contribution of renewables to the energy mix. And the circumstances are just right:
Technology maturity – The renewable power technologies featured in Repower America are in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation of development and come with the associated reliability and enhancements mature technology offers.
No fuel costs – At a time when fossil fuel prices are volatile and will inevitably rise, shifting to power sources with free and limitless fuel inputs makes sense.
Investor support – During the past few years, clean energy has been among the fastest growing sectors in the venture capital and investment banking worlds – in 2007 global investment in clean energy climbed 60% to $150 billion.
1 Utility understanding – Virtually every state now has experience in integrating renewable electricity into its energy mix. Twenty-eight states now have renewable energy portfolio standards.
Resource availability – Whether it is solar, wind or geothermal, each of these renewable resource types could on its own theoretically meet all of the nation’s power demands, now and well into the future.
Materials availability – There are no limiting material constraints with any of the renewable generation technologies comprising the Repower America scenarios. Key inputs are steel, concrete and glass. Wind turbines blades also use carbon fiber or fiber glass and PV cells rely on specialized materials, none of which will be limited at the levels and timeframe for Repower America.
Workforce availability – Manufacturing of components and construction of the renewable power plants themselves are skills that can be learned and are easily transferable from other sectors. In Pennsylvania former steel workers are now building wind turbine components. In Iowa, former appliance manufacturers are doing the same. In California and New Jersey, former construction workers are now installing rooftop solar PV. And clean energy programs are already emerging at colleges and trade schools around the nation.
Growth histories and trajectories – US installed capacities of solar photovoltaic and wind power have been growing at annual rates of 20 and 30 percent respectively; solar thermal has just begun rapid expansion; and the geothermal industry is booming with 97 projects under development in thirteen states.2
The Benefits: Existing, proven renewable power technologies rely on fuels that are free and limitless. They emit no CO2. They eliminate the uncertainty of volatile fossil fuel prices. And, they’re a promising engine of job creation: a $100 billion investment in a clean energy economy over two years would create 2 million new jobs with a significant portion of these jobs helping to revive struggling construction and manufacturing sectors.3 Research indicates that renewable electricity capacity at levels similar to Repower America would employ 6 million American workers.
4 How We Get There
Accelerate the ramp-up of clean, renewable electricity sources through new policies and increased private and public investment in technologies that work. These technologies already exist and have been expanding, but effective policies must be implemented to unleash their potential.
Key Sources of Energy in a Repowered America
Wind Power: Enough wind blows through the Midwest each day to supply all of America’s electricity. And US businesses have already been capitalizing on this potential: for three years in a row, the US has led the world in wind power installations, and our capacity is growing – we are now the world leader in wind electricity generation and 2008 will be another record year for new wind energy projects.5 In addition to hundreds of companies directly involved in wind energy today, there are more than 16,000 companies employing over 1 million people that manufacture products for industries that could support wind components.6
Solar Thermal Power: Concentrated solar thermal power systems, also known as solar thermal power, covering a parcel of land fewer than 100 miles on a side in the Southwest could theoretically supply 100% of America’s electricity needs.7 A proven technology just beginning to scale up in the US, solar thermal power already produces enough electricity for about 100,000 homes and large-scale projects by eight different companies are underway with major utilities to power 10 times that many homes in the next three years. Industry engineers project that plants put into operation after 2013 – and perhaps sooner – will come equipped with 6-8 hours of energy storage, allowing them to continue to provide power after the sun goes down.
Solar Photovoltaics: Photovoltaic (PV) technology converts sunlight directly into electricity. Solar PV can be mounted on rooftops, integrated into roof tiles, or placed in empty fields, and can produce electricity even on cloudy days. Germany is a great testament to PV generation potential under cloudy skies: Germany’s solar resources (see map below) are similar to those of Alaska’s, one of the US’s least desirable solar regions. Yet, Germany currently has eight times the installed solar capacity of the entire US due to its supportive policy framework.8 With vastly better solar resources in the US and continued innovations and price reductions in solar technologies, the domestic photovoltaic industry has already begun to take off. The solar PV industry is projected to continue its explosive growth, expanding at 40% annually until 2010. Worldwide investments in the production of PV are estimated to rise to the same level as those for semiconductor manufacturing by 2010 and global manufacturing capacity is projected to increase from 90-100 production lines (greater than 1MW capacity) to 400.9 There are currently thousands of companies developing, producing, installing, and maintaining PV systems in the US.
Geothermal Power: The United States is already the world leader in geothermal electricity generation, producing enough electricity from geothermal systems to power approximately 1.5 million homes. Industry experts project that geothermal development can expand to provide 15-30 times as much power over the next few decades due to recent advances in enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) that can harness heat energy stored up to 10km below the surface. According to an MIT study, 100,000 megawatts of electricity could be installed by 2050 with EGS technology that could power over 70 million homes. In fact, the US government recently issued permits for geothermal project development on 190 million acres of federal land in twelve states.10 This potential just scratches the surface of a massive amount of recoverable heat energy in America that is equivalent to 2,000 years worth of 2005 US electricity consumption.11
Other Renewable Generation: Other renewable generation includes biomass power, which can encompass many sources of carbon-free electricity like agricultural or wood residues and municipal waste. Advanced hydropower technologies are emerging that harness the energy from waves, currents, and tides.
Join us: "I want to Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years."
Signed,
Renewables in the News
Wind
The world’s largest wind farm, the Titan Wind Project, will be built in South Dakota - the 2,000 turbine, 5,050 MW wind farm will provide enough energy to power 1.5 million homes—more than five times the amount needed to power every home in South Dakota.12
The first US offshore wind farm is scheduled to be completed in 2012. Bluewater Wind is building the project near Rohoboth Beach, Delaware, capitalizing on Delaware's coastal winds, which are capable of producing a year-round average output of over 5,200 MW, or four times the average electrical consumption of the entire state. The project will produce just over $2 billion in annual revenue on the wholesale electricity market, create hundreds of new union jobs, and provide roughly $100 million in direct local union construction wages.13
North Dakota recently opened FPL Energy's Oliver County Wind Energy Center – which is capable of generating enough electricity from its 54 turbines to power more than 24,000 homes.14
Hopkins Ridge and Wild Horse wind facilities in Washington State produce enough renewable energy to meet the needs of approximately 100,000 homes – combined, the two facilities have paid more than $3.3 million in state, county and local taxes since going into operation, and additional turbines are being planned.15
Right in the heart of the oil patch, Houston has started receiving about 25 percent of its electricity from wind – the city council decided to take action to provide cleaner and cheaper energy to its citizens after Hurricane Katrina damaged oil and gas infrastructure, increasing the price of natural gas.16
Solar Thermal
Spanish engineering firm Abengoa Solar and Arizona Public Service Co. plan to build a 280-megawatt solar thermal plant – producing enough electricity for about 60,000 homes and creating 2,000 construction jobs near Phoenix.17
The US Army plans to install a 500-megawatt solar thermal power farm at Fort Irwin, California, as part of its bid to reduce a $3 billion annual energy bill – the Mojave Desert plant would feed electricity to the grid by 2014, achieving savings of $21 million and 4 million tons of CO2 over 25 years.18
Ausra Solar officially opened the first U.S. solar thermal power manufacturing plant in May 2008 – the Las Vegas facility will employ a staff of 50. At full capacity, it will annually produce more than 700 megawatts of solar collectors – enough to power nearly half a million homes, and keep 1,400 construction workers employed building solar power plants.19
The largest single source of solar energy in the world is located in the Mojave Desert – the site has 400,000 mirrors laid over an area of 1,000 acres.20
Solar PV
Solar companies SunPower and Optisolar have jointly announced plans with the California utility PG&E to build the largest solar PV plant in the world, 800 megawatts in total, powering 239,000 homes.21
Thin-film solar startup Konarka converted a 250,000 square foot advanced Polaroid printing facility into its new manufacturing plant in New Bedford, Massachusetts. Konarka retrofitted much of the old printing equipment for solar fabrication and hired the technology and process engineering teams from Polaroid. The company plans to add over 100 employees as production increases over the next 2-3 years.22
Using solar PV systems, the roofs on FedEx Corp’s Fontana and Whittier distribution facilities now provide about half of their annual energy needs.23
Geothermal
The geothermal industry is booming with 97 projects under development in thirteen states that, together, are expected to double US geothermal generating capacity.24
In August, Raser Technologies announced construction on New Mexico's first commercial 10-megawatt geothermal power plant – producing enough electricity to power approximately 1.5 million homes.25
Construction has begun on a 100-megawatt geothermal plant on Shoshone tribal land in Box Elder County, Utah – nearly two-thirds of the energy generated at the plant will be delivered to Riverside, California where it will account for 20% of the city's base-load energy.26
References
1.UNEP. http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=538&ArticleID=5849&l=en
2.Earth Policy Institute. http://www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2008/Update77_data.htm
3.Center for American Progress. "Green Recovery." October 2008.
4.Roger Bezdek. "Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency: Economic Drivers for the 21st Century." Prepared by Management Information Services for the American Solar Energy Society. 2007. (Note: figure specific to renewable electricity)
5.http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/Wind_Installations_Surpass_20K_MW_03Sept08.html
6.US DOE. "20% Wind Energy by 2030 Report". 2008.
7.Based on CSP resource potential analysis from NREL in ASES, “Tackling Climate Change in the US: Potential Carbon Emissions Reductions from Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by 2030.” 2007. http://www.ases.org/climatechange
8.Solar Energy Industry Association. "US Solar Industry Year in Review 2007."
9.Dr. Henning Wicht. "Market Watch: Solar Cell Investments to Reach Parity with Semiconductor Industry by 2010". June 23, 2008. http://www.isuppli.com/marketwatchdetail.aspx?id=38
10.US Department of Interior, http://www.doi.gov/news/08_News_Releases/102208b.html
11.MIT. "The Future of Geothermal Energy." 2006.
12.Clipper Wind, http://www.clipperwind.com/pr_073008.html; http://www.census-charts.com/HF/South_Dakota.html
13.New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/magazine/14windt.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all
14.FPL Energy (June 24,2008) http://www.fplenergy.com/news/contents/2008/062408.shtml
15.PSE, http://www.pse.com/newsarchive/Pages/NewsMegawattMilestone.aspx?navpath=/InsidePSE/newsroom
16.Chapman, Lindsey. “Houston turns to wind for power, savings.” Finding Dulcinea. http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/business/July-08/Houston-Turns-to-Wind-for-Power--Savings.html
17.Christa Marshall, “Huge solar projects at risk by failure to extend tax credit” 07/07/08, http://climatewire.net/
18.CnetNews.com, http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10060244-54.html
19.“Ausra opens first U.S. solar thermal power factory” 06/30/2008 http://www.ausra.com/
20.EcoWorldly, http://ecoworldly.com/2008/04/12/mega-solar-the-worlds-13-biggest-solar-thermal-energy-projects/comment-page-4/
21.The Mercury News, http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_10262551
22.Earth2tech.com http://earth2tech.com/2008/10/07/konarka-turns-on-1gw-thin-film-solar-printing-press/
23.RenewableEnergyWorld.com http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/partner/story?id=53501
24.Lester Brown, “New Energy Economy Emerging in the United States,” http://www.earthpolicy.org/Updates/2008/Update77.htm
25.Department of Energy, http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/archive.cfm/pubDate=%7Bd%20'2008-09-10'%7D#11970
26.Marketwatch.com, http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/northwestern-band-shoshone-nation-announces/story.aspx?guid=%7BC676D0AD-8B5A-487B-A07B-443087E99C10%7D&dist=hppr
A project of The Alliance for Climate Protection
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Energy Efficiency- Repower America
Energy Efficiency
The Problem: Millions of dollars and enormous amounts of energy are wasted each year simply because our homes and businesses aren’t as energy-efficient as they could be. Meanwhile, our demand for electricity is expected to grow by over 25% in the next two decades.1
The Solution: To make the most out of the energy we currently produce, America needs a national efficiency upgrade. Make new buildings more efficient, upgrade old buildings to save energy, and update our appliances and equipment to use less energy and perform the same or more functions than they do now.
The Benefits: Energy efficiency is where the greatest and most immediate gains can be made. Household and commercial building efficiency can increase by 30% with existing technologies – an upgrade that will save the typical homeowner $450 dollars a year on utility bills.2 Improving devices that use power in “stand-by” mode alone would save consumers $3 billion per year.3 These improvements will drive economic growth. Many efficiency upgrades will pay for themselves in just a year or two. The result will be more comfortable and valuable homes and buildings, lower utility bills, and tens of thousands of new jobs as we retrofit existing buildings to be more efficient and manufacture more American products that use less energy.
How We Get There
Implement government policies and programs that quickly improve efficiency in all sectors of our economy. There are clear examples of the enormous financial and technical benefits of investing in efficiency. What’s needed now is a systematic approach to achieve such savings across the board, so that ALL businesses and homeowners can start realizing savings. This should be a massive mobilization that will involve utilities and their regulators; equipment and appliance manufacturers and installers; and homeowners, business operators and landlords across the nation. Lights, air conditioning, heaters, appliances, computers, electronics, water heaters, motors, fans – each of these technology categories can perform its function and consume 20%-70% less energy (and much more, in some cases). Plus, with every successive generation of new products, more savings can be achieved. It's about an ongoing economy-wide effort to make every home and every building – along with every item inside those homes and buildings – more efficient.
Elements to include in a National Efficiency Upgrade:
Home and building upgrades: Neighborhood by neighborhood, town by town. All buildings eligible for an efficiency upgrade can immediately save energy and lower utility bills.
New building standards: National efficiency standards for new homes and commercial buildings so people pay less to keep warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer.
Updated appliance and equipment standards: Revisit our national standards and Energy Star program to ensure that everything people buy is more efficient.
Regulatory reforms: Efficiency targets or other regulatory schemes so utilities have an incentive to sell less electricity, rather than more.
Commercial and industrial programs: Incentive programs that encourage businesses of all sizes to become more efficient and productive.
Retrofit and replacement programs: Incentives to scrap inefficient appliances like old refrigerators or industrial motors that waste energy and money and replace them with the most efficient machinery.
Owner-renter incentives: Policies that align the interests of owners and renters, so both benefit from the lower utility bills.
Buyer-seller incentives: Policies to ensure that homes are upgraded when they change hands, so they become more efficient through energy inspections, efficiency ratings, or other programs.
Universal installation of existing technologies: Greater access to tools and technologies, like smart meters and programmable thermostats, which allow for better control of energy use.
Join us: "I want to Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years."
Signed,
Did you know?
In the United States, buildings are responsible for approximately 30% of greenhouse gas emissions and 72% of all electricity use. By making simple changes, like using the proper amount of insulation and the best windows, we can significantly save the energy it takes to heat, cool, light, and otherwise provide power to buildings. And, with buildings lasting for 40-50 years or more, efficiency choices we make now will last at least a generation.
Investment in efficiency now will pay for itself through lower energy bills. Lowering energy costs for schools means more funds for teachers, books, and scholarships. Retrofitting hospitals releases money for better patient care. And incentives for private-sector investment in commercial buildings and factories helps American businesses and consumers save money and improve our quality of life.5
Use of energy-efficient appliances in 2007 avoided global warming pollution equivalent to nearly 27 million cars.6 By similarly improving all of America's buildings, industry, and transportation -- we could reduce annual emissions equivalent to nearly 400 million cars. That's at least 2 billion fewer tons of CO2 or more than 6,000 times the weight of the Empire State Building.
7 Improving energy-efficiency would provide much needed financial relief to very low-income families. Home energy costs have increased much faster than incomes for very low-income households, rising 33 percent since 1998. Families eligible for federal home energy assistance spend 20% of their income on home energy bills – six times more than average. Improving efficiency in very low-income housing would deliver 25 percent to 40 percent energy savings in up to 25 million residential units.
8 Retrofitting buildings to improve energy efficiency will create tens of thousands of new jobs in a variety of sectors, including: Electricians, Heating/Air Conditioning Installers, Carpenters, Construction Equipment Operators, Roofers, Insulation Workers, Carpenter Helpers, Industrial Truck Drivers, Construction Managers, Building Inspectors.9
California’s energy efficiency program has saved the equivalent of the energy required to power 3.8 million homes – and avoided the need to build 24 power plants.10
References
1.Annual Energy Outlook 2008, EIA
2.Partnerships for Home Energy Efficiency http://www.energystar.gov/ia/home_improvement/PHEE_Report_final.pdf.
3.Department of Energy, http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/classactivities/energyarticles.html#energyvampires
4.World Resources Institute, http://www.wri.org/chart/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-flow-chart; US Department of Energy http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/?id=view_book&c=1
1.CAP/PERI. “Green Recovery Report.” September 2008.
2.DOE Energy Star. http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=about.ab_index
6.McKinsey & Company. “Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost?” 2007.
7.Enterprise Community Partners. “Bringing Home the Benefit of Energy Efficiency to Low-Income Households: The Case for a National Commitment.” 2008.
8.Center for American Progress. “Green Recovery.” September 2008.
9.California Public Utilities Commission. “Energy Efficiency California’s Highest Priority Resource.” 2006
The Problem: Millions of dollars and enormous amounts of energy are wasted each year simply because our homes and businesses aren’t as energy-efficient as they could be. Meanwhile, our demand for electricity is expected to grow by over 25% in the next two decades.1
The Solution: To make the most out of the energy we currently produce, America needs a national efficiency upgrade. Make new buildings more efficient, upgrade old buildings to save energy, and update our appliances and equipment to use less energy and perform the same or more functions than they do now.
The Benefits: Energy efficiency is where the greatest and most immediate gains can be made. Household and commercial building efficiency can increase by 30% with existing technologies – an upgrade that will save the typical homeowner $450 dollars a year on utility bills.2 Improving devices that use power in “stand-by” mode alone would save consumers $3 billion per year.3 These improvements will drive economic growth. Many efficiency upgrades will pay for themselves in just a year or two. The result will be more comfortable and valuable homes and buildings, lower utility bills, and tens of thousands of new jobs as we retrofit existing buildings to be more efficient and manufacture more American products that use less energy.
How We Get There
Implement government policies and programs that quickly improve efficiency in all sectors of our economy. There are clear examples of the enormous financial and technical benefits of investing in efficiency. What’s needed now is a systematic approach to achieve such savings across the board, so that ALL businesses and homeowners can start realizing savings. This should be a massive mobilization that will involve utilities and their regulators; equipment and appliance manufacturers and installers; and homeowners, business operators and landlords across the nation. Lights, air conditioning, heaters, appliances, computers, electronics, water heaters, motors, fans – each of these technology categories can perform its function and consume 20%-70% less energy (and much more, in some cases). Plus, with every successive generation of new products, more savings can be achieved. It's about an ongoing economy-wide effort to make every home and every building – along with every item inside those homes and buildings – more efficient.
Elements to include in a National Efficiency Upgrade:
Home and building upgrades: Neighborhood by neighborhood, town by town. All buildings eligible for an efficiency upgrade can immediately save energy and lower utility bills.
New building standards: National efficiency standards for new homes and commercial buildings so people pay less to keep warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer.
Updated appliance and equipment standards: Revisit our national standards and Energy Star program to ensure that everything people buy is more efficient.
Regulatory reforms: Efficiency targets or other regulatory schemes so utilities have an incentive to sell less electricity, rather than more.
Commercial and industrial programs: Incentive programs that encourage businesses of all sizes to become more efficient and productive.
Retrofit and replacement programs: Incentives to scrap inefficient appliances like old refrigerators or industrial motors that waste energy and money and replace them with the most efficient machinery.
Owner-renter incentives: Policies that align the interests of owners and renters, so both benefit from the lower utility bills.
Buyer-seller incentives: Policies to ensure that homes are upgraded when they change hands, so they become more efficient through energy inspections, efficiency ratings, or other programs.
Universal installation of existing technologies: Greater access to tools and technologies, like smart meters and programmable thermostats, which allow for better control of energy use.
Join us: "I want to Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years."
Signed,
Did you know?
In the United States, buildings are responsible for approximately 30% of greenhouse gas emissions and 72% of all electricity use. By making simple changes, like using the proper amount of insulation and the best windows, we can significantly save the energy it takes to heat, cool, light, and otherwise provide power to buildings. And, with buildings lasting for 40-50 years or more, efficiency choices we make now will last at least a generation.
Investment in efficiency now will pay for itself through lower energy bills. Lowering energy costs for schools means more funds for teachers, books, and scholarships. Retrofitting hospitals releases money for better patient care. And incentives for private-sector investment in commercial buildings and factories helps American businesses and consumers save money and improve our quality of life.5
Use of energy-efficient appliances in 2007 avoided global warming pollution equivalent to nearly 27 million cars.6 By similarly improving all of America's buildings, industry, and transportation -- we could reduce annual emissions equivalent to nearly 400 million cars. That's at least 2 billion fewer tons of CO2 or more than 6,000 times the weight of the Empire State Building.
7 Improving energy-efficiency would provide much needed financial relief to very low-income families. Home energy costs have increased much faster than incomes for very low-income households, rising 33 percent since 1998. Families eligible for federal home energy assistance spend 20% of their income on home energy bills – six times more than average. Improving efficiency in very low-income housing would deliver 25 percent to 40 percent energy savings in up to 25 million residential units.
8 Retrofitting buildings to improve energy efficiency will create tens of thousands of new jobs in a variety of sectors, including: Electricians, Heating/Air Conditioning Installers, Carpenters, Construction Equipment Operators, Roofers, Insulation Workers, Carpenter Helpers, Industrial Truck Drivers, Construction Managers, Building Inspectors.9
California’s energy efficiency program has saved the equivalent of the energy required to power 3.8 million homes – and avoided the need to build 24 power plants.10
References
1.Annual Energy Outlook 2008, EIA
2.Partnerships for Home Energy Efficiency http://www.energystar.gov/ia/home_improvement/PHEE_Report_final.pdf.
3.Department of Energy, http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/classactivities/energyarticles.html#energyvampires
4.World Resources Institute, http://www.wri.org/chart/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-flow-chart; US Department of Energy http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/?id=view_book&c=1
1.CAP/PERI. “Green Recovery Report.” September 2008.
2.DOE Energy Star. http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=about.ab_index
6.McKinsey & Company. “Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost?” 2007.
7.Enterprise Community Partners. “Bringing Home the Benefit of Energy Efficiency to Low-Income Households: The Case for a National Commitment.” 2008.
8.Center for American Progress. “Green Recovery.” September 2008.
9.California Public Utilities Commission. “Energy Efficiency California’s Highest Priority Resource.” 2006
Repower America
The Plan: Repower America
America faces unprecedented economic, environmental and national security challenges. We urgently need new jobs, stable energy prices, and freedom from dirty fossil fuels and global warming pollution.
Finally, there’s a solution as big as our problems: a bold plan to Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years.
First described in a speech in July by Al Gore, Repower America means new industries with high-paying jobs. It means lower energy costs. It means replacing coal and foreign oil with clean domestic sources. It is a vital step toward protecting the environment and solving the climate crisis.
How do we do it?
Immediately commence a clean energy plan that includes efficiency, generation, transmission, and transportation.
Energy Efficiency: A national upgrade to eliminate waste, save money, and improve comfort. Make every bit of energy we produce work harder for us.
Renewable Generation: Accelerate the ramp-up of clean, renewable electricity sources through policies that support increased private and public investment in technologies that work, like wind, solar, and geothermal.
Unified National Smart Grid: Modernize transmission infrastructure so that clean electricity generated anywhere in America can power homes and businesses across the nation; Build national electricity 'interstates' that move power quickly and cheaply to where it is needed; Establish local smart grids that buy and sell power from households and support clean plug-in cars.
Automobiles: Transition to efficient plug-in cars that 'fuel' with clean electricity. In combination with the unified grid, a nationwide fleet of plug-in vehicles also provides a key source of electricity storage.
The Analysis
What does it mean that all electricity generation within 10 years will be met only by zero-carbon sources of power? The We Campaign, with assistance and advice from dozens of energy experts, assessed the potential for meeting electricity demand from a combination of well-understood sources. See the analysis here
America faces unprecedented economic, environmental and national security challenges. We urgently need new jobs, stable energy prices, and freedom from dirty fossil fuels and global warming pollution.
Finally, there’s a solution as big as our problems: a bold plan to Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years.
First described in a speech in July by Al Gore, Repower America means new industries with high-paying jobs. It means lower energy costs. It means replacing coal and foreign oil with clean domestic sources. It is a vital step toward protecting the environment and solving the climate crisis.
How do we do it?
Immediately commence a clean energy plan that includes efficiency, generation, transmission, and transportation.
Energy Efficiency: A national upgrade to eliminate waste, save money, and improve comfort. Make every bit of energy we produce work harder for us.
Renewable Generation: Accelerate the ramp-up of clean, renewable electricity sources through policies that support increased private and public investment in technologies that work, like wind, solar, and geothermal.
Unified National Smart Grid: Modernize transmission infrastructure so that clean electricity generated anywhere in America can power homes and businesses across the nation; Build national electricity 'interstates' that move power quickly and cheaply to where it is needed; Establish local smart grids that buy and sell power from households and support clean plug-in cars.
Automobiles: Transition to efficient plug-in cars that 'fuel' with clean electricity. In combination with the unified grid, a nationwide fleet of plug-in vehicles also provides a key source of electricity storage.
The Analysis
What does it mean that all electricity generation within 10 years will be met only by zero-carbon sources of power? The We Campaign, with assistance and advice from dozens of energy experts, assessed the potential for meeting electricity demand from a combination of well-understood sources. See the analysis here
U.S. SEEKS DISRUPTIVE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES.
May 6, 2009 – Vol.14 No.7
U.S. SEEKS DISRUPTIVE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES.
by Bruce Mulliken, Green Energy News
Here’s a question I always wanted to ask Washington politicos:
“Please answer yes or no. If there was a new energy technology discovered that was pollution free, emitted no greenhouse gases, utilized only domestic resources, created thousands if not millions of jobs, opened new business opportunities yet was so cheap that it would put both Big Oil and Big Coal out of business, would you support it, do everything in your power to help fully commercialize this technology? (Again, please just answer yes or no. Saying there is no such a technology is not an answer.)”
The replies would tell who really has the intestinal fortitude to tackle the dual challenges of energy and climate change.
Typically, Washington is not about making major changes and major disruptions yet there is a very faint ray of hope that considering energy and climate, something drastic has to happen and Washington is willing to do it. Evidence of that showed up in a funding opportunities notice released as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) (better known as the Stimulus Package). The following is the official summary of this particular funding opportunity:
“ The U.S. Department of Energy, Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) (a new DOE Agency created specifically to foster R&D of transformational energy related technologies) requests proposals for Advanced Research Projects. Transformational technologies are defined as those that disrupt the status quo; not merely better than current technologies, but significantly better. This RFP supports the Nation’s need to overcome the threats posed by climate change and energy security, arising from its reliance on traditional uses of fossil fuels and the dominant use of oil in transportation. Concept papers are required, and are due 6/2/09. Final proposals accepted by invitation only.”
With this notice, and the creation of ARPA-E itself, the Obama Administration is sending a new message: Yes, we are willing to replace oil and coal with something else. Yes, we are willing to look into drastic changes.
The award ceiling is $20 million. Cost sharing or matching funding is required and eligible applicants are unrestricted (i.e., open to any type of entity), but it appears as though you or your company must be a registered Federal Government Vendor. (If you’re interested in this opportunity, check with DOE for particulars on this requirement. I may be wrong.)
One of the technologies that seems a likely candidate for this funding is the rebirth of cold fusion, or now known as a low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) such as featured in a 60 Minutes TV news magazine segment on April 19. A LENR device that supplied heat or power (or both) using a radiation-free nuclear reaction to power our homes and our cars would certain fit the definition of “transformational technology”. (Defined as one that disrupts the status quo.)
In the television report three laboratories were profiled: Energetics Technologies, a New Jersey based company with research facilities in Omer, Israel; SRI International of Menlo Park, California; and ENEA, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies.
There’s more to the story than was broadcast that evening.
What the report didn’t make clear was that Energetics Technologies pioneered the LENR process profiled on the program, which was then successfully replicated by both SRI and ENEA. Further, 60 Minutes didn’t point out that the now famous Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) memorandum which, according to the broadcast, concludes that there is ‘no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced in these experiments.” The memorandum specifically referred to the results of the DARPA-funded SRI replication, and to the ENEA replication of the research pioneered by Energetics Technologies.
We’ll be hearing more from Energetics Technologies. That’s for certain.
Another game-changing, disruptive technology that may be eagerly seeking government funding is a new battery developed by Ceramatec, the R&D arm of CoorsTek, and a developer of advanced materials and electrochemical devices.
Ceramatec, of Salt Lake City, Utah, isn’t building electric car batteries. It’s developing deep-storage battery systems for homes that can be recharged by solar or small wind power. The electro chemistry the company is using is solid sodium/sulfur that uses a paper thin ceramic membrane between the two electrodes to allow the battery to operate at fairly low temperatures, below 90 degrees C (195 F) (Usually this chemistry operates at much higher temperatures.)
The company says its battery would be the size of a refrigerator and store enough power for a whole home. The breakthrough is in the cost: only about $2000. At that cost electricity could be stored for less than 3 cents per kilowatt hour, spread out over the 10 year life span of the battery. The low cost stored power, combined with the dropping cost of solar and wind small energy, could soon equal electric costs less than from the utility companies. Homeowners could disconnect themselves from the antiquated power grid: That would be disruptive.
Whether or not the above two companies apply for this round of funding is only their business. Certainly there are many disruptive, or wannabe disruptive technologies, floating around out there eagerly seeking government funding.
In general, though, the hitch in government funding is government involvement. The government doesn’t just pop checks in the mail with a note of Good Luck. It stays involved. Will companies or individuals be willing to share their ideas with Washington?
Links:
Ceramatec
http://www.ceramatec.com
Energetics Technologies
http://www.energeticstechnologies.com
U.S. Department of Energy, Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) funding notice.
http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&flag2006=false&oppId=47045
U.S. SEEKS DISRUPTIVE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES.
by Bruce Mulliken, Green Energy News
Here’s a question I always wanted to ask Washington politicos:
“Please answer yes or no. If there was a new energy technology discovered that was pollution free, emitted no greenhouse gases, utilized only domestic resources, created thousands if not millions of jobs, opened new business opportunities yet was so cheap that it would put both Big Oil and Big Coal out of business, would you support it, do everything in your power to help fully commercialize this technology? (Again, please just answer yes or no. Saying there is no such a technology is not an answer.)”
The replies would tell who really has the intestinal fortitude to tackle the dual challenges of energy and climate change.
Typically, Washington is not about making major changes and major disruptions yet there is a very faint ray of hope that considering energy and climate, something drastic has to happen and Washington is willing to do it. Evidence of that showed up in a funding opportunities notice released as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) (better known as the Stimulus Package). The following is the official summary of this particular funding opportunity:
“ The U.S. Department of Energy, Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) (a new DOE Agency created specifically to foster R&D of transformational energy related technologies) requests proposals for Advanced Research Projects. Transformational technologies are defined as those that disrupt the status quo; not merely better than current technologies, but significantly better. This RFP supports the Nation’s need to overcome the threats posed by climate change and energy security, arising from its reliance on traditional uses of fossil fuels and the dominant use of oil in transportation. Concept papers are required, and are due 6/2/09. Final proposals accepted by invitation only.”
With this notice, and the creation of ARPA-E itself, the Obama Administration is sending a new message: Yes, we are willing to replace oil and coal with something else. Yes, we are willing to look into drastic changes.
The award ceiling is $20 million. Cost sharing or matching funding is required and eligible applicants are unrestricted (i.e., open to any type of entity), but it appears as though you or your company must be a registered Federal Government Vendor. (If you’re interested in this opportunity, check with DOE for particulars on this requirement. I may be wrong.)
One of the technologies that seems a likely candidate for this funding is the rebirth of cold fusion, or now known as a low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) such as featured in a 60 Minutes TV news magazine segment on April 19. A LENR device that supplied heat or power (or both) using a radiation-free nuclear reaction to power our homes and our cars would certain fit the definition of “transformational technology”. (Defined as one that disrupts the status quo.)
In the television report three laboratories were profiled: Energetics Technologies, a New Jersey based company with research facilities in Omer, Israel; SRI International of Menlo Park, California; and ENEA, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies.
There’s more to the story than was broadcast that evening.
What the report didn’t make clear was that Energetics Technologies pioneered the LENR process profiled on the program, which was then successfully replicated by both SRI and ENEA. Further, 60 Minutes didn’t point out that the now famous Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) memorandum which, according to the broadcast, concludes that there is ‘no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced in these experiments.” The memorandum specifically referred to the results of the DARPA-funded SRI replication, and to the ENEA replication of the research pioneered by Energetics Technologies.
We’ll be hearing more from Energetics Technologies. That’s for certain.
Another game-changing, disruptive technology that may be eagerly seeking government funding is a new battery developed by Ceramatec, the R&D arm of CoorsTek, and a developer of advanced materials and electrochemical devices.
Ceramatec, of Salt Lake City, Utah, isn’t building electric car batteries. It’s developing deep-storage battery systems for homes that can be recharged by solar or small wind power. The electro chemistry the company is using is solid sodium/sulfur that uses a paper thin ceramic membrane between the two electrodes to allow the battery to operate at fairly low temperatures, below 90 degrees C (195 F) (Usually this chemistry operates at much higher temperatures.)
The company says its battery would be the size of a refrigerator and store enough power for a whole home. The breakthrough is in the cost: only about $2000. At that cost electricity could be stored for less than 3 cents per kilowatt hour, spread out over the 10 year life span of the battery. The low cost stored power, combined with the dropping cost of solar and wind small energy, could soon equal electric costs less than from the utility companies. Homeowners could disconnect themselves from the antiquated power grid: That would be disruptive.
Whether or not the above two companies apply for this round of funding is only their business. Certainly there are many disruptive, or wannabe disruptive technologies, floating around out there eagerly seeking government funding.
In general, though, the hitch in government funding is government involvement. The government doesn’t just pop checks in the mail with a note of Good Luck. It stays involved. Will companies or individuals be willing to share their ideas with Washington?
Links:
Ceramatec
http://www.ceramatec.com
Energetics Technologies
http://www.energeticstechnologies.com
U.S. Department of Energy, Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E) funding notice.
http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&flag2006=false&oppId=47045
Bank demolishing 16 new and partly built houses
No sale: Bank destroys newly built homes
Blaming the current housing market, a bank decides it would be cheaper to tear down 16 new and partly built homes rather than try to finish and sell them.
By The Wall Street Journal
Shannon Bennet picks through the site in Victorville, Calif., where homes were demolished rather than completed and sold. © Nick Ut/Associated Press
more on WSJ.com
In bank demolition, echoes of the Great Depression
Home price drops leave more ‘underwater’
Foreclosure trouble comes to rural America
A Texas bank is about done demolishing 16 new and partly built houses acquired in Southern California through foreclosure, figuring it was better to knock them down than to attempt to sell them in the depressed housing market.
Guaranty Bank of Austin is wrecking the structures to provide a "safe environment" for neighbors of the abandoned housing tract in Victorville, a high-desert city about 85 miles northeast of Los Angeles, a bank spokesman said.
Victorville city officials said the bank told them the cost of finishing the development would exceed what they could bring in by selling the homes. The houses were built by a California developer less than two years ago, according to city records.
The bank also faced escalating city fines as vandals and squatters took over the sprawling housing project, leaving behind graffiti and drug paraphernalia, city officials said.
What's your home worth?
"It's unfortunate," said George Duran, the city's code-enforcement manager. "We would have hoped for these houses to be finished. But it's up to the owner to see what is best for them."
Home prices in San Bernardino County, where Victorville is located, have fallen 60% from the housing peak in 2006, according to research firm DataQuick. The median new-home price in Victorville is $265,990, according to Hanley Wood Market Intelligence. Homes in the Victorville development were priced at a range of $280,00 to $350,000 in early 2008, Hanley Wood said.
Guaranty spokesman John Wessman said four of the 16 structures slated for demolition were "substantially complete," while the others were less than half finished and "exposed to the elements." Guaranty obtained the property through foreclosure in December. The builder, Matthews Homes, couldn't be reached.
A Guaranty official in California told the Victorville newspaper, the Daily Press, that it would cost more than $1 million to finish developing the property so it could be occupied. Wessman said that official wasn't authorized to speak to reporters. He said he didn't know how much it would cost to finish the job. A demolition job of this size would likely cost more than $100,000, according to a person familiar with the matter.
A video of the houses being knocked down was posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site called Vision Victory Manifesto, which has been warning of economic disaster. He declined to give his full name for this story.
Many of the appliances had been stripped out of the houses, according to the demolition company. "I was a little surprised they couldn't come up with an alternative" to demolition, said Ron Willemsen, president of Intravaia Rock & Sand Inc. of Montclair, Calif., which did the demolition.
Willemsen said he would grind up much of the wood into mulch for landscaping, while some of the lumber would be sent to Mexico for construction there.
Home affordability calculator
Yearly gross income $
Monthly debt payments $
Cash available for purchase $
Demolishing vacant houses in economically troubled, inner-city neighborhoods is common. But the demolitions in Victorville show how the housing market is weighing on lenders even in once-booming suburbs. Guaranty Bank has significant exposure to construction loans to homebuilders. Last month, its parent company, Guaranty Financial Group, was issued a "cease and desist" order by the federal Office of Thrift Supervision, citing the firm's "unsafe and unsound banking practices."
Many lenders, like Guaranty, have been foreclosing on homebuilders whose projects have gone bust. Regulators told Guaranty to come up with a plan to dispose of its foreclosed properties. But finding buyers is difficult, as home values remain under pressure.
Posters wanted to know why homes werent donated to Habitat for Humanity. A sign of the times? Purely business decision. A donation to Habitat would have gotten them a tax write-off, at the very least. At the same time, nobody would want these homes to become crack dens, either.
Your thoughts?
Blaming the current housing market, a bank decides it would be cheaper to tear down 16 new and partly built homes rather than try to finish and sell them.
By The Wall Street Journal
Shannon Bennet picks through the site in Victorville, Calif., where homes were demolished rather than completed and sold. © Nick Ut/Associated Press
more on WSJ.com
In bank demolition, echoes of the Great Depression
Home price drops leave more ‘underwater’
Foreclosure trouble comes to rural America
A Texas bank is about done demolishing 16 new and partly built houses acquired in Southern California through foreclosure, figuring it was better to knock them down than to attempt to sell them in the depressed housing market.
Guaranty Bank of Austin is wrecking the structures to provide a "safe environment" for neighbors of the abandoned housing tract in Victorville, a high-desert city about 85 miles northeast of Los Angeles, a bank spokesman said.
Victorville city officials said the bank told them the cost of finishing the development would exceed what they could bring in by selling the homes. The houses were built by a California developer less than two years ago, according to city records.
The bank also faced escalating city fines as vandals and squatters took over the sprawling housing project, leaving behind graffiti and drug paraphernalia, city officials said.
What's your home worth?
"It's unfortunate," said George Duran, the city's code-enforcement manager. "We would have hoped for these houses to be finished. But it's up to the owner to see what is best for them."
Home prices in San Bernardino County, where Victorville is located, have fallen 60% from the housing peak in 2006, according to research firm DataQuick. The median new-home price in Victorville is $265,990, according to Hanley Wood Market Intelligence. Homes in the Victorville development were priced at a range of $280,00 to $350,000 in early 2008, Hanley Wood said.
Guaranty spokesman John Wessman said four of the 16 structures slated for demolition were "substantially complete," while the others were less than half finished and "exposed to the elements." Guaranty obtained the property through foreclosure in December. The builder, Matthews Homes, couldn't be reached.
A Guaranty official in California told the Victorville newspaper, the Daily Press, that it would cost more than $1 million to finish developing the property so it could be occupied. Wessman said that official wasn't authorized to speak to reporters. He said he didn't know how much it would cost to finish the job. A demolition job of this size would likely cost more than $100,000, according to a person familiar with the matter.
A video of the houses being knocked down was posted on YouTube by the founder of a Web site called Vision Victory Manifesto, which has been warning of economic disaster. He declined to give his full name for this story.
Many of the appliances had been stripped out of the houses, according to the demolition company. "I was a little surprised they couldn't come up with an alternative" to demolition, said Ron Willemsen, president of Intravaia Rock & Sand Inc. of Montclair, Calif., which did the demolition.
Willemsen said he would grind up much of the wood into mulch for landscaping, while some of the lumber would be sent to Mexico for construction there.
Home affordability calculator
Yearly gross income $
Monthly debt payments $
Cash available for purchase $
Demolishing vacant houses in economically troubled, inner-city neighborhoods is common. But the demolitions in Victorville show how the housing market is weighing on lenders even in once-booming suburbs. Guaranty Bank has significant exposure to construction loans to homebuilders. Last month, its parent company, Guaranty Financial Group, was issued a "cease and desist" order by the federal Office of Thrift Supervision, citing the firm's "unsafe and unsound banking practices."
Many lenders, like Guaranty, have been foreclosing on homebuilders whose projects have gone bust. Regulators told Guaranty to come up with a plan to dispose of its foreclosed properties. But finding buyers is difficult, as home values remain under pressure.
Posters wanted to know why homes werent donated to Habitat for Humanity. A sign of the times? Purely business decision. A donation to Habitat would have gotten them a tax write-off, at the very least. At the same time, nobody would want these homes to become crack dens, either.
Your thoughts?
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
second chance for M Vick?
I saw something today about whether or not Michael Vick should get another chance to play in the NFL after bankrolling a dog-fighting ring. Hes now in a Levenworth prison but is due to get out in the near future and be on house arrest at his home. if he shows NO remorse then maybe he needs more time in prison to think about it. if he shows genuine remorse perhaps house arrest and probation is enough to make the point. Your thoughts?
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Hialeah Plants 18,000 trees since 2002
Hialeah City officials claim they have planted over 18,000 trees in their city since 2002. The Mayor and Council members had a tree-planting ceremony April 24 in honor of Arbor day. Wonder how many Miami Springs has planted in that same time frame?
Annapolis Energy Zone Program Makes Solar Installations Easy
Annapolis Energy Zone Program Makes Solar Installations Easy
Written by Ariel Schwartz
Published on April 29th, 2009
Posted in alternative energy, solar energy
Last week, we took a look at San Diego’s revolutionary solar plan, which will allow residents to pay for solar panels through property tax bills over a 20 year period. But don’t pack your bags for Southern California just yet. Annapolis, MD has a similar plan , dubbed the Annapolis (EZ) Energy Zone Program.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Like the San Diego plan, the EZ Program offers tax-exempt, low-interest rate loans courtesy of th Chamber of Commerce Foundation to city residents who buy energy efficient equipment (i.e. solar panels, energy-efficient HVAC systems, high-efficiency windows). The loans are paid back through resident’ property tax bills. When a property is sold, the new homeowners take on the loan–so when you move, you don’t have to keep paying for your old home’s solar panels. The Maryland Energy Administration will even conduct energy efficiency audits and give homeowners a list of certified contractors who can install energy-efficiency equipment.
In the past, Annapolis homeowners have been discouraged by solar panels’ 10 year payback period. But the new program is much more attractive since costs can be transferred between homeowners. Maryland’s program begins next November. Don’t be surprised if you see similar municpial solar financing programs in even more cities between now and then
Written by Ariel Schwartz
Published on April 29th, 2009
Posted in alternative energy, solar energy
Last week, we took a look at San Diego’s revolutionary solar plan, which will allow residents to pay for solar panels through property tax bills over a 20 year period. But don’t pack your bags for Southern California just yet. Annapolis, MD has a similar plan , dubbed the Annapolis (EZ) Energy Zone Program.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Like the San Diego plan, the EZ Program offers tax-exempt, low-interest rate loans courtesy of th Chamber of Commerce Foundation to city residents who buy energy efficient equipment (i.e. solar panels, energy-efficient HVAC systems, high-efficiency windows). The loans are paid back through resident’ property tax bills. When a property is sold, the new homeowners take on the loan–so when you move, you don’t have to keep paying for your old home’s solar panels. The Maryland Energy Administration will even conduct energy efficiency audits and give homeowners a list of certified contractors who can install energy-efficiency equipment.
In the past, Annapolis homeowners have been discouraged by solar panels’ 10 year payback period. But the new program is much more attractive since costs can be transferred between homeowners. Maryland’s program begins next November. Don’t be surprised if you see similar municpial solar financing programs in even more cities between now and then
Immigration
It seems to me that since we are having such a problem filling our military slots we should make immigrants a deal- You serve in Uncle Sam's Army for five years and you qualify for a green card. They would be paying taxes, learning English, learning a trade, and doing a patriotic deal for the US of A for a nominal fee. No? It could help solve the immigration problem AND the military problem.
Texas Solar- page 2- with comments
Parabolic troughs are a type of concentrated solar power that uses shaped mirrors which follow the sun during the day and heat up a liquid which then heats water to make steam in order to move conventional turbines.
Parabolic dishes are like large satellite dishes with curved mirrors that reflect sunlight to a central point where the energy heats to 750 C. A liquid also heats up and drives a piston to generate electricity.
Central receivers use an array of mirrors in a tower to heat up a liquid to 650 C. Steam is produced to drive a turbine. Linear fresnel reflectors use long rows of reflectors to heat a liquid or to directly make steam. They don’t generate as much energy but could cost less in production and long-term maintenance. To reduce energy consumption hot waters could be used. For example, over 80% of homes in Israel have solar water heaters, according to the report.
New Jobs
Also cited is the job growth potential should Texas become a world leader in solar technology. An institute at the University of Texas at Austin found that 123,000 jobs could be created in the long-term in manufacturing and solar electrical services.
Texas is already a leader in wind power. Coupled with its’ colosal solar potential, the state is poised to become a true force of nature in the clean energy arena, nationally and perhaps globally.
Image Credit: Public Domain
Tags: photovoltaics, solar power, texas solar, US solar
You might also like:
Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
Annapolis Energy Zone Program Makes Solar Installations Easy
World’s First Freshwater Wind Farm Coming to New York?
Space Based Solar Power Satellite Program from PG&E and Solaren in CaliforniaAdd a comment or questionRecommend this post (5)Share/Email Stumble ItBuzz up!« Previous postNext post »27 Comments
1
buck said on April 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 pm
How much does a 900 square mile plant cost? I am guessing it is insane.
2
JOhn Davis said on April 22nd, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Wow you do raise some good points dude!
RT
http://www.privacy.pro.tc
3
anon said on April 22nd, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Umm, 11 30×30 mi plants That’s nearly 11,000 square miles of solar panels. That’s TWO CONNECTICUTS paved over with mirrors. I can buy a yard-square meter online for $40, which means I could buy just the mirrors needed for a cool $1,140 billion dollars. Maybe there’s some economy of scale, but that’s still just the mirrors, no liquid sodium or piping or anything.
By contract, a 1,140 billion could be used to build 250 grossly overbudget $1.1 billion dollar nuclear reactors plus fuel costs for eternity, each generating 1,100 MW, for a little under TWICE the energy Texas needs. Make them thorium burning, and the waste isn’t even a big deal. Just a whole bunch of power on a footprint of new york city instead of all of connecticut.
4
Jake Richardson said on April 22nd, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Thanks. I think that a lot of the solar collecting technology there will also be manufactured there, and it will cost far less.
5
Allie said on April 23rd, 2009 at 12:18 am
Put people to work building that trillion dollar solar power plant.
6
Payam said on April 23rd, 2009 at 12:26 am
Sure it will cost alot, but just imagine how much of that money we would save after 10 years of using it.
You guys are all talking about short term gains when there is virtually none except for job positions. Long term is where the true value lies.
7
Papi_pol said on April 23rd, 2009 at 12:28 am
This is a very good story. Thinking that most cities may run on the sun would really reduce our daily fossil fuel use for a significant degree.
8
iamlost said on April 23rd, 2009 at 1:00 am
If only this technology is cheap enough for poor countries which happens to have an abundance of sunlight
9
anon said on April 23rd, 2009 at 1:15 am
Haha what are you smoking papi? You’re phrasing that awfully positively. . . There isn’t a situation where ANY of our states will be pursuing projects on that order any time soon. It’s a dream.
10
Aodhan said on April 23rd, 2009 at 4:00 am
The point of building these solar plants is to make Texas a self sufficient state that has a clean burning, permanent way to provide energy to its resident. I do not know much about the Texan geology but I have never heard about Texas being abundant in Uranium or other nuclear fuels. One thing that Texas does have is plenty of sunshine. Texas using solar power is pretty much the same as the great plain states using wind turbines. While the initial cost is a lot to ask for, it is for the long term. The cost over the period of time should be reasonably low as long as the plants do not get into disrepair. In addition, using the solar energy does not leave any waste behind. While the waste may not initially be a big deal, it will accumulate over the years and eventually turn into a big deal. While 11 900 square miles is very big, Texas is also a very big state. Texas is over 250,000 square miles which means 11,000 square miles is not really a big deal. Plus, since the whole state receives pretty much the same sunshine, the plants can be put in the more inhospitable land. Also, all of the jobs created will help to provide a real boost to the economy.
Parabolic dishes are like large satellite dishes with curved mirrors that reflect sunlight to a central point where the energy heats to 750 C. A liquid also heats up and drives a piston to generate electricity.
Central receivers use an array of mirrors in a tower to heat up a liquid to 650 C. Steam is produced to drive a turbine. Linear fresnel reflectors use long rows of reflectors to heat a liquid or to directly make steam. They don’t generate as much energy but could cost less in production and long-term maintenance. To reduce energy consumption hot waters could be used. For example, over 80% of homes in Israel have solar water heaters, according to the report.
New Jobs
Also cited is the job growth potential should Texas become a world leader in solar technology. An institute at the University of Texas at Austin found that 123,000 jobs could be created in the long-term in manufacturing and solar electrical services.
Texas is already a leader in wind power. Coupled with its’ colosal solar potential, the state is poised to become a true force of nature in the clean energy arena, nationally and perhaps globally.
Image Credit: Public Domain
Tags: photovoltaics, solar power, texas solar, US solar
You might also like:
Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
Annapolis Energy Zone Program Makes Solar Installations Easy
World’s First Freshwater Wind Farm Coming to New York?
Space Based Solar Power Satellite Program from PG&E and Solaren in CaliforniaAdd a comment or questionRecommend this post (5)Share/Email Stumble ItBuzz up!« Previous postNext post »27 Comments
1
buck said on April 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 pm
How much does a 900 square mile plant cost? I am guessing it is insane.
2
JOhn Davis said on April 22nd, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Wow you do raise some good points dude!
RT
http://www.privacy.pro.tc
3
anon said on April 22nd, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Umm, 11 30×30 mi plants That’s nearly 11,000 square miles of solar panels. That’s TWO CONNECTICUTS paved over with mirrors. I can buy a yard-square meter online for $40, which means I could buy just the mirrors needed for a cool $1,140 billion dollars. Maybe there’s some economy of scale, but that’s still just the mirrors, no liquid sodium or piping or anything.
By contract, a 1,140 billion could be used to build 250 grossly overbudget $1.1 billion dollar nuclear reactors plus fuel costs for eternity, each generating 1,100 MW, for a little under TWICE the energy Texas needs. Make them thorium burning, and the waste isn’t even a big deal. Just a whole bunch of power on a footprint of new york city instead of all of connecticut.
4
Jake Richardson said on April 22nd, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Thanks. I think that a lot of the solar collecting technology there will also be manufactured there, and it will cost far less.
5
Allie said on April 23rd, 2009 at 12:18 am
Put people to work building that trillion dollar solar power plant.
6
Payam said on April 23rd, 2009 at 12:26 am
Sure it will cost alot, but just imagine how much of that money we would save after 10 years of using it.
You guys are all talking about short term gains when there is virtually none except for job positions. Long term is where the true value lies.
7
Papi_pol said on April 23rd, 2009 at 12:28 am
This is a very good story. Thinking that most cities may run on the sun would really reduce our daily fossil fuel use for a significant degree.
8
iamlost said on April 23rd, 2009 at 1:00 am
If only this technology is cheap enough for poor countries which happens to have an abundance of sunlight
9
anon said on April 23rd, 2009 at 1:15 am
Haha what are you smoking papi? You’re phrasing that awfully positively. . . There isn’t a situation where ANY of our states will be pursuing projects on that order any time soon. It’s a dream.
10
Aodhan said on April 23rd, 2009 at 4:00 am
The point of building these solar plants is to make Texas a self sufficient state that has a clean burning, permanent way to provide energy to its resident. I do not know much about the Texan geology but I have never heard about Texas being abundant in Uranium or other nuclear fuels. One thing that Texas does have is plenty of sunshine. Texas using solar power is pretty much the same as the great plain states using wind turbines. While the initial cost is a lot to ask for, it is for the long term. The cost over the period of time should be reasonably low as long as the plants do not get into disrepair. In addition, using the solar energy does not leave any waste behind. While the waste may not initially be a big deal, it will accumulate over the years and eventually turn into a big deal. While 11 900 square miles is very big, Texas is also a very big state. Texas is over 250,000 square miles which means 11,000 square miles is not really a big deal. Plus, since the whole state receives pretty much the same sunshine, the plants can be put in the more inhospitable land. Also, all of the jobs created will help to provide a real boost to the economy.
Solar Group Purchasing Campaigns
Solar Group Purchasing Campaigns are all active. Sign up to lower the cost of solar power for your home by using 1BOG’s solar group purchasing
We are a nationwide, community-based program that organizes residents locally and negotiates group discounts with solar energy installers in your city, using a comprehensive vendor selection process. As a group we are more knowledgeable about solar, more powerful, and we can make a difference.
Sign up for a free home evaluation for solar energy today!There’s no obligation and we keep your information private. You can see who’s interested in solar power in your area by searching our BIG SOLAR MAP (we show more of the signups in the area as you zoom in).
Featured Area: Topanga Canyon, part of the Los Angeles solar energy group purchase
We are a nationwide, community-based program that organizes residents locally and negotiates group discounts with solar energy installers in your city, using a comprehensive vendor selection process. As a group we are more knowledgeable about solar, more powerful, and we can make a difference.
Sign up for a free home evaluation for solar energy today!There’s no obligation and we keep your information private. You can see who’s interested in solar power in your area by searching our BIG SOLAR MAP (we show more of the signups in the area as you zoom in).
Featured Area: Topanga Canyon, part of the Los Angeles solar energy group purchase
Solar Could Power Texas- CleanTechnica.com
Written by Jake Richardson
Published on April 22nd, 2009
27 CommentsPosted in alternative energy
A recent study released by Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization, and several environmental organizations has concluded that solar technology alone could supply electricity for the whole state.
They cite a number of mind-blowing prospects from a variety of sources, all pointing to Texas as having the number one solar generating potential of the US states.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Concentrating solar power in Texas was found by one study to have a potential capacity of 148,000 megawatts. That is just one solar technology type. (The current total solar power capacity of the US is about 9,000 MW, - wind is 26,000 MW). Their study document also states, ” Photovoltaic plants covering 30 miles by 30 miles could power the entire state.” The types of technology referenced are photovoltaics, thin film photovoltaics, concentrating solar power, parabolic troughs, parabolic dishes/sterling engines, central receivers, linear fresnel reflectors, and solar water heaters.
Technologies
Thin film photovoltaics employ semiconductors several millionths of a meter thick and can be applied to many sun-facing surfaces such as building exteriors. Production costs and times are low. The number of thin film modules produced may exceed the crystalline variety within 1-2 years.
>> Looking for solar? Join the nation’s most effective community solar purchasing program.
Concentrating solar power uses mirrors to increase energy intensity to heat a liquid to 400 degrees C, which reportedly stores the energy more efficiently that conversion directly to electricity that is stored in batteries. The stored heated liquid can produce energy on cloudy days and at night.
Published on April 22nd, 2009
27 CommentsPosted in alternative energy
A recent study released by Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization, and several environmental organizations has concluded that solar technology alone could supply electricity for the whole state.
They cite a number of mind-blowing prospects from a variety of sources, all pointing to Texas as having the number one solar generating potential of the US states.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Concentrating solar power in Texas was found by one study to have a potential capacity of 148,000 megawatts. That is just one solar technology type. (The current total solar power capacity of the US is about 9,000 MW, - wind is 26,000 MW). Their study document also states, ” Photovoltaic plants covering 30 miles by 30 miles could power the entire state.” The types of technology referenced are photovoltaics, thin film photovoltaics, concentrating solar power, parabolic troughs, parabolic dishes/sterling engines, central receivers, linear fresnel reflectors, and solar water heaters.
Technologies
Thin film photovoltaics employ semiconductors several millionths of a meter thick and can be applied to many sun-facing surfaces such as building exteriors. Production costs and times are low. The number of thin film modules produced may exceed the crystalline variety within 1-2 years.
>> Looking for solar? Join the nation’s most effective community solar purchasing program.
Concentrating solar power uses mirrors to increase energy intensity to heat a liquid to 400 degrees C, which reportedly stores the energy more efficiently that conversion directly to electricity that is stored in batteries. The stored heated liquid can produce energy on cloudy days and at night.
Clean technica
World’s First Freshwater Wind Farm Coming to New York?
Written by Timothy B. Hurst
Published on April 23rd, 2009Posted in alternative energy, wind energy
With all of the attention being paid to where the United States’ first offshore wind farm will be located—there are existing proposals at various stages for ocean-based offshore wind farms in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York and Texas—New York Power Authority (NYPA) yesterday announced a major public-private initiative for the potential development of wind power projects in the state of New York’s fresh waters of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario.
7
votesBuzz up!In an initiative known as the Great Lakes Offshore Wind Project, NYPA released a Request for Expressions of Interest (RFEI) to initiate efforts to develop offshore wind projects in the Great Lakes. If somehow completed before the above mentioned projects, the Great Lakes project would not only be the first offshore wind farm in the U.S., it would be the first freshwater wind farm in the world.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Government and industry support for Great Lakes wind only part of equation
In approving the offshore projects and their locations, the state will hold several community meetings to gather public input and statements. New York officials say they will entertain proposals with a rated minimum capacity of 120 megawatts, but that the exact size and location of the wind farms would need to be hashed out by developers, regulators and other stakeholders.
“We have an opportunity to ensure that New York is the national leader in the growth of the clean energy economy, which will create thousands of jobs across the state,” said New York Governor David A. Paterson on Tuesday. “To get there, we must take full advantage of our natural resources, including hydropower, solar, and wind.”
Governor Patterson went on to say that harnessing the power of wind is critical to achieving his stated goal for New York to meet 45 percent of its electricity needs through improved energy efficiency and renewable sources by 2015.
Officials from the wind energy industry applauded the Earth Day announcement from Gov. Patterson. “This is a great sign for offshore wind energy in the U.S.,” said Denise Bode, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association, in a statement released Wednesday. “As we seek to dramatically expand wind energy, both on- and offshore, it is vital that we commit to long-term stable policies such as the Renewable Electricity Standard to allow the market to reach its full potential and enable businesses to build new factories and create new jobs,” added Bode.
The RFEI for the Great Lakes Offshore Wind Project can be accessed on the NYPA website. The deadline for receipt of proposals is June 15, 2009.
Written by Timothy B. Hurst
Published on April 23rd, 2009Posted in alternative energy, wind energy
With all of the attention being paid to where the United States’ first offshore wind farm will be located—there are existing proposals at various stages for ocean-based offshore wind farms in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York and Texas—New York Power Authority (NYPA) yesterday announced a major public-private initiative for the potential development of wind power projects in the state of New York’s fresh waters of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario.
7
votesBuzz up!In an initiative known as the Great Lakes Offshore Wind Project, NYPA released a Request for Expressions of Interest (RFEI) to initiate efforts to develop offshore wind projects in the Great Lakes. If somehow completed before the above mentioned projects, the Great Lakes project would not only be the first offshore wind farm in the U.S., it would be the first freshwater wind farm in the world.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Government and industry support for Great Lakes wind only part of equation
In approving the offshore projects and their locations, the state will hold several community meetings to gather public input and statements. New York officials say they will entertain proposals with a rated minimum capacity of 120 megawatts, but that the exact size and location of the wind farms would need to be hashed out by developers, regulators and other stakeholders.
“We have an opportunity to ensure that New York is the national leader in the growth of the clean energy economy, which will create thousands of jobs across the state,” said New York Governor David A. Paterson on Tuesday. “To get there, we must take full advantage of our natural resources, including hydropower, solar, and wind.”
Governor Patterson went on to say that harnessing the power of wind is critical to achieving his stated goal for New York to meet 45 percent of its electricity needs through improved energy efficiency and renewable sources by 2015.
Officials from the wind energy industry applauded the Earth Day announcement from Gov. Patterson. “This is a great sign for offshore wind energy in the U.S.,” said Denise Bode, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association, in a statement released Wednesday. “As we seek to dramatically expand wind energy, both on- and offshore, it is vital that we commit to long-term stable policies such as the Renewable Electricity Standard to allow the market to reach its full potential and enable businesses to build new factories and create new jobs,” added Bode.
The RFEI for the Great Lakes Offshore Wind Project can be accessed on the NYPA website. The deadline for receipt of proposals is June 15, 2009.
“Wind Energizer” by Leviathan Energy reportedly increases wind turbine efficiency 30% in field tests.
Passive structure design of “Wind Energizer” by Leviathan Energy reportedly increases wind turbine efficiency 30% in field tests.
Technological advancements in wind energy efficiency have generally come incrementally and usually made via a process of increasingly large wind turbine blades. Put simply, the model has been: longer blades = more output per turbine.
But that pattern of incremental improvements may be a thing of the past if Leviathan Energy has anything to say about it. Leviathan Energy has completed initial testing on their Wind Energizer unit and is reporting gains in wind turbine output in the ballpark of 30% — and as much as 150% at lower wind speeds.
The principle theory at work is that by placing passive objects around a wind farm it will change the circulation around a large wind turbine. The advancement is not in the turbine itself, but rather in the area around it, as such, units can be adapted to any wind turbine from any manufacturer.
“This is a disruptive technology,” Leviathan Energy CEO Dr. Daniel Farb told me via telephone from Israel last week. “We are changing the environment of the wind turbine; this is a very different approach.”
» See also: Annapolis Energy Zone Program Makes Solar Installations Easy
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Farb is a bit of a modern day renaissance man. Trained as a medical doctor—an opthalmologist—he also has a business degree, and perhaps most importantly, a real determination to make innovations in renewable energy. “Sometimes people are able to develop ideas that other people that may have missed by taking a fresh perspective on something,” said Farb, whose team at Leviathan Energy also makes a vertical axis wind turbine and small hydroelectric turbines.
The Wind Energizer is a donut-shaped structure made from steel and plastic, but the exact dimensions of it depend on site-specific data, like the tower height, length of the blades, prevailing wind direction and intensity, etc. As determined in the customized modeling process, Farb said that the structure may not even make an entire circle (as is depicted in the images).
“We’re shaping the flow so that the highest velocities hit the blades. By increasing velocity at exactly the right point we’ve been able to make serious advances in the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy,” Dr. Farb explained.
In the initial phase of testing, Leviathan measured an average of 20-40% more output with the turbines using the Wind Energizer, as compared to the control units. At lower wind speeds (0-6 meters per second) the turbines with the Wind Energizer had gains as high as 150%.
Leviathan’s early testing has been conducted on a relatively small scale, using commercially-available small turbines with 3-meter blades. Farb told me that Leviathan is currently exploring opportunities for third-party testing and certification on a commercial scale wind farm.
Leviathan estimates that the period of return on investment for the wind energizer to be about four to five years and that wind farm operators would likely see decreased maintenance costs and longer life span because the Wind Energizer balances the velocity load and shearing forces on the turbine.
“If this were implemented worldwide there is no quicker way to grow our renewable energy capacity,” Dr. Farb said.
And if the Wind Energizer performs as well on a large scale as it did on a smaller scale, he may be right.
If you want to learn more about the Wind Energizer, or any of Leviathan Energy’s other products, they will be at the American Wind Energy Association’s WINDPOWER 2009conference and expo in Chicago next week.
Technological advancements in wind energy efficiency have generally come incrementally and usually made via a process of increasingly large wind turbine blades. Put simply, the model has been: longer blades = more output per turbine.
But that pattern of incremental improvements may be a thing of the past if Leviathan Energy has anything to say about it. Leviathan Energy has completed initial testing on their Wind Energizer unit and is reporting gains in wind turbine output in the ballpark of 30% — and as much as 150% at lower wind speeds.
The principle theory at work is that by placing passive objects around a wind farm it will change the circulation around a large wind turbine. The advancement is not in the turbine itself, but rather in the area around it, as such, units can be adapted to any wind turbine from any manufacturer.
“This is a disruptive technology,” Leviathan Energy CEO Dr. Daniel Farb told me via telephone from Israel last week. “We are changing the environment of the wind turbine; this is a very different approach.”
» See also: Annapolis Energy Zone Program Makes Solar Installations Easy
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Farb is a bit of a modern day renaissance man. Trained as a medical doctor—an opthalmologist—he also has a business degree, and perhaps most importantly, a real determination to make innovations in renewable energy. “Sometimes people are able to develop ideas that other people that may have missed by taking a fresh perspective on something,” said Farb, whose team at Leviathan Energy also makes a vertical axis wind turbine and small hydroelectric turbines.
The Wind Energizer is a donut-shaped structure made from steel and plastic, but the exact dimensions of it depend on site-specific data, like the tower height, length of the blades, prevailing wind direction and intensity, etc. As determined in the customized modeling process, Farb said that the structure may not even make an entire circle (as is depicted in the images).
“We’re shaping the flow so that the highest velocities hit the blades. By increasing velocity at exactly the right point we’ve been able to make serious advances in the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy,” Dr. Farb explained.
In the initial phase of testing, Leviathan measured an average of 20-40% more output with the turbines using the Wind Energizer, as compared to the control units. At lower wind speeds (0-6 meters per second) the turbines with the Wind Energizer had gains as high as 150%.
Leviathan’s early testing has been conducted on a relatively small scale, using commercially-available small turbines with 3-meter blades. Farb told me that Leviathan is currently exploring opportunities for third-party testing and certification on a commercial scale wind farm.
Leviathan estimates that the period of return on investment for the wind energizer to be about four to five years and that wind farm operators would likely see decreased maintenance costs and longer life span because the Wind Energizer balances the velocity load and shearing forces on the turbine.
“If this were implemented worldwide there is no quicker way to grow our renewable energy capacity,” Dr. Farb said.
And if the Wind Energizer performs as well on a large scale as it did on a smaller scale, he may be right.
If you want to learn more about the Wind Energizer, or any of Leviathan Energy’s other products, they will be at the American Wind Energy Association’s WINDPOWER 2009conference and expo in Chicago next week.
4 Things to Consider Before Going Solar
4 Things to Consider Before Going Solar
Written by Sarah Lozanova
Published on March 6th, 2008
5 CommentsPosted in alternative energy, energy efficiency, solar energy
Solar thermal technology provides space heating and hot water and is a frequently forgotten member of the solar family. These highly effective systems are popular in many parts of the globe, from China to Greece to Zimbabwe. They displace the use of the existing hot water heater and heating equipment, typically saving either natural gas or electricity.Solar thermal is a more mature technology than solar photovoltaic systems that produce electricity. It has been used for centuries for water heating. In fact, even Leonardo Da Vinci owned one.
When considering the installation of such a system, it is important to consider the following items.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Solar Exposure
For those readers who live in the northern hemisphere, it is best to point the panels facing south. If the mounting surface is not angled to face due south, the efficiency of the system may decrease.
Solar thermal panels are usually mounted in a fixed position and do not have tracking equipment to follow the sun. This is because the panels have copper pipe connected to them and a fluid running through the panel. They also can be heavy and a bit clunky to follow the sun’s angle.
It is important to consider your solar window and how much shade may interfere. Solar thermal panels generate heat, instead of an electric current, so they are not as sensitive to a little shade. It is however recommended to have clear solar exposure from 10 am-2 pm as a minimum.
Remember that the sun is lower in the sky in the winter months. If your solar system will provide heat, a good winter solar window is very important. If the roof of your home is not ideal, it is possible to mount panels as an awning, on the ground, or on a garage.
Space for Solar Equipment
Solar thermal systems in cooler climates require room for a solar storage tank near the existing hot water heater. This heater becomes the back-up when there is not enough sunshine to heat the water. Therefore, you will need space for a tank up to 30 inches in diameter for most applications. It needs to be in a heated space and will have a pipe connecting it to the existing hot water heater.
Heating Equipment
If you live in a cooler climate and you have enough room for panels, the solar system can assist with heating your home. Solar works best with forced air furnaces and radiant floor heating systems. Boilers with radiators operate at a higher temperature and are not usually good for interfacing with solar.
Energy Efficiency
Before forking out a bunch of money on a solar system, it is a good idea to consider energy efficiency first. Weatherization and conservation are often a low hanging fruit for energy and money savings. Water-saving shower heads, front loading washers, and washing clothes in cold water can help to maximize your solar energy.
The sun can heat between 50%-100% of the water used in a home, depending on climate, use, and system size. Efficiency helps increase that percentage, especially in cloudy weather
Written by Sarah Lozanova
Published on March 6th, 2008
5 CommentsPosted in alternative energy, energy efficiency, solar energy
Solar thermal technology provides space heating and hot water and is a frequently forgotten member of the solar family. These highly effective systems are popular in many parts of the globe, from China to Greece to Zimbabwe. They displace the use of the existing hot water heater and heating equipment, typically saving either natural gas or electricity.Solar thermal is a more mature technology than solar photovoltaic systems that produce electricity. It has been used for centuries for water heating. In fact, even Leonardo Da Vinci owned one.
When considering the installation of such a system, it is important to consider the following items.
» See also: Wind Turbine Output Boosted 30% by Breakthrough Design
» Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Solar Exposure
For those readers who live in the northern hemisphere, it is best to point the panels facing south. If the mounting surface is not angled to face due south, the efficiency of the system may decrease.
Solar thermal panels are usually mounted in a fixed position and do not have tracking equipment to follow the sun. This is because the panels have copper pipe connected to them and a fluid running through the panel. They also can be heavy and a bit clunky to follow the sun’s angle.
It is important to consider your solar window and how much shade may interfere. Solar thermal panels generate heat, instead of an electric current, so they are not as sensitive to a little shade. It is however recommended to have clear solar exposure from 10 am-2 pm as a minimum.
Remember that the sun is lower in the sky in the winter months. If your solar system will provide heat, a good winter solar window is very important. If the roof of your home is not ideal, it is possible to mount panels as an awning, on the ground, or on a garage.
Space for Solar Equipment
Solar thermal systems in cooler climates require room for a solar storage tank near the existing hot water heater. This heater becomes the back-up when there is not enough sunshine to heat the water. Therefore, you will need space for a tank up to 30 inches in diameter for most applications. It needs to be in a heated space and will have a pipe connecting it to the existing hot water heater.
Heating Equipment
If you live in a cooler climate and you have enough room for panels, the solar system can assist with heating your home. Solar works best with forced air furnaces and radiant floor heating systems. Boilers with radiators operate at a higher temperature and are not usually good for interfacing with solar.
Energy Efficiency
Before forking out a bunch of money on a solar system, it is a good idea to consider energy efficiency first. Weatherization and conservation are often a low hanging fruit for energy and money savings. Water-saving shower heads, front loading washers, and washing clothes in cold water can help to maximize your solar energy.
The sun can heat between 50%-100% of the water used in a home, depending on climate, use, and system size. Efficiency helps increase that percentage, especially in cloudy weather
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)