Powering The Future

Yeah, efficiency improvements are the only way forward really. Negawatts, not megawatts. This will allow us to deploy fewer new power plants but make their impact on the grid larger. Fortunatey, I think we're starting to get close to a tipping point with solar power where it's really going to take off. We're not their yet, but the price per watt has come down quite a bit and there seems to be a lot of downward pressure on the price (as compared to fossil fuels where there is upward pressure). Sadly, I think the only way to save our asses is through the market because we just don't seem to have the political will (mid/long term focus) to fix our energy problems through policy. Unfortunately, the market can't "see" past its nose and is largely reactive, not proactive.

 

If you'd have said, "I had a chick explain to me that she doesn't bother . . . "

I'd figure you were talking about, "she-who-must-be-obeyed" ... as that's my daily trial.


.

 

I've tried to promote the idea of Solar panels for home power at work for a while, after all it's SoCal. Oddly many of the engineers I work with don't get the advantage. They always talk about how much it would cost, and how much they would need. That is until we start talking about things they could/should do to improve efficiency and lower energy consumption.

Once they see the bottom line numbers for being off-grid, or at least get a significant decrease in energy usage they get motivated. There is nothing quite like an Engineer motivated to do a personal project to improve their life. I've seen some engineers do some crazy, and cool, stuff.

 

It's amazing how much we could gain simply through efficiency/conservation. Take the average traffic intersection. Just replacing all of the incandescent bulbs with LEDs across large metro areas would save an enormous amount of energy w/o affecting lifestyle in the slightest. Would save municipalities scads of cash too.

 

A few years ago one of my coworkers and I talked about power and lighting in a house. Wife and I were looking at buying land and building(using shipping containers ). Of course this was before the market crashed and we got locked into the house we have now.

The thing that was amazing was how little power you need given what is available now. The goal was to match what we had now, so we used my current house as an example size and lighting wise, just to have a good comparison. Using efficient appliances, lots of insulation, efficient use of fans to exhausting heat during the night, LED lighting as much as possible, and solar and wind power it was amazing how much we could improve on the traditional stick built houses out there in SoCal now.

Unfortunately I don't think the prices are quite to the point where full retrofits make sense for most people, but based on the numbers I ran for new construction there is a HUGE advantage to started out with an off-grid and low energy use goal.

I'm still trying to find good financing for Solar on my current house.

 

The missing factor is the social/economic aspect. As we saw with gas prices, all of the sudden there is a trigger point that jolts people into (re)action. This includes both the smart and the slow. I've run into WAY too many people who complain about their electric bill, but don't "think" about their electric bill.....making it clear that when they can't pay the electric bill is when the serious thinking will start.

 

One should note, that off grid solar (battery based) at about twice the net price with half the efficiency. The reasons are somewhat complicated, but while a off grid system might on average yield about 1/3-1/2of name plate rating on average insolation, while a grid tie might yield ~ 75-90% depending on conditions.

Batteries add to both the initial cost, as well as the ongoing costs. Aside from loses based on basic battery charging efficiencies (~80%) a great uncalculated loss is the power that isn't generated after the batteries near full charge. As the charge controller "dials" down because the battery is near full, the available potential is lost as there is "no where to put it" In an ideal world, your batteries would come full just as the sun sets, but it almost never works that way. If you have enough PV/battery to fully charge your battery nearly every sunny day, you will be giving up some harvest. On the other hand, if you harvest all day but you batteries don't get fully charged you will pay the price in short battery life.

We live off grid ~ 6 months a year. We use ~.6kwh/day and can harvest ~ 1.5 kwh. The difference is essentially wasted. We make an attempt to time shift our use, such that we add discretionary loads (power tools, lap tops etc) when the house batteries are full. We are able to live quite comfortably on that little power, but we have to work at it, and we have designed the house around the idea of limited power.

So the goal ought not (generally) be to "go off grid" but rather to manage loads efficiently and use the great "battery" capacity of the grid to absorb your peak production capacity.

Another aspect that is overlooked in the attempt to keep Pv at home, is that it is in many cases more bang for the buck by investing in a solar co-op that can maximize solar harvest because it may have a better location, and the economy of scale might bring more net/net bang for the buck.

 

I've seen another side of this. There still is a considerable stigma in some communities towards anything "Green". It's really interesting to see the conversation change when you are talking about energy solutions and alternatives. You can start out talking about it as a way to save money and they will listen, but as soon as you drop any of the "Green" keywords you can see them mentally running to the switch to turn completely off.

I have my theories as to why this exists, and seems to be growing, but I know it would not be popular here. I can say that I have turned several "Anti-Green" people onto a few shows and online sources that have cleared the fog. While they would never consider themselves to be "Green" they all have done at least the minimum to reduce their energy usage or increase their efficiency.

The economic aspect of all this is more universal, but I think it gets lost in the preaching, hypocrisy and arrogance that SOME high profile people have on this subject. Honestly I think we need a common enemy to motivate the masses, and that common enemy needs to be universally accepted.

 

Interesting points, thanks for the good read. :rockon:

I've thought about this lately. Considering how many developments there are in SoCal, and how compartmentalized they seem to be I think it is very feasible for these little communities to include large solar arrays owned and managed by something like the Home Owners Associations, and sell the power to the community.

It is happening in a way with some shopping centers I have noticed lately. Up in Palmdale there is a Walmart/Kohls/Target shopping center with a number of other small shops. They started replacing all the light poles with new poles that have wind generators on top. I talked to one of the guys putting in the new units and he said that when they are done they will be able to generate 80% of the entire shopping centers power, at peak wind of course. They have some agreement between the owners of the shopping center(probably Walmart) and the business owners.

I wish we could see more empty SoCal roof tops covered with solar panels, such a waste of space.

 

I don't think the day that you will is too far off, mate. As solar prices continue to drop and energy in general gets more expensive (global demand for coal is rising) I foresee a "solar explosion" in places like the SW where solar resources are excellent.

 

I don't think the day that you will is too far off, mate. As solar prices continue to drop and energy in general gets more expensive (global demand for coal is rising) I foresee a "solar explosion" in places like the SW where solar resources are excellent.

 

1. Conservation and efficiency are more cost effective than "go get more" of any form of energy. Tripp is correct, negawatts are more cost effective than kilowatts. This has been confirmed in detail by the Rocky Mountain Institute, US Dept of Defense and many others.

2. Distributed power is more cost effective than centralized. Hence, putting photovoltaic panels on every roof and along highways is better than large, capital intensive plants.

3. This is the path Germany has taken in a location that lacks hydropower and they are doing very well (including apartments, farms and offices).

4. Global Peak Oil occurred in 2005 (in 1970 for the US). We are on the downslope now. Those who think and act long term will benefit. Those in denial or avoidance will cry, complain and be angry because they can no longer cost effectively substitute oil or more energy for knowledge.

 

I've been saying that for over 40 years, it's taking longer than I expected.

All of the problems except the cost of the actual PV material has been solved and the PV problem is getting closer to a cost effective solution.

Getting the price of the electronics to convert DC to AC and safely sync to the power line down to reasonable levels was one stumbling block that I'm willing to declare solved. The electronics are still over priced but not completely wacko anymore.

 

Started pricing a solar array for the house recently and I was amazed at how much the prices have dropped.

 

Costco has a solar panel "kit" now... it will reach the masses, soon.

 

Beware "kits" Often time over price with stuff you don't really need.

We used to suggest that the installed price was ~$10/watt. Now days, I suggest that the number is closer to $5-8. I think most of the price drop is due to the world wide recession more than any efficiencies of production.

Icarus

 

Nothing like buying a Prius to put one into the middle of what you are describing. I bought a 2001 and thought I was buying a great mpg vehicle, but then I quickly found out that it was the "insult" car of choice by 2002 by some in the media. This was done by way too many who actually knew better, but could not control themselves.

The real enemy is the extreme thinking of the far right and far left that makes for emotional entertainment, but nothing of lasting value. (e.g. Gotta go full tilt nuclear vs. full tilt "green"....by tomorrow.) Unfortunately, that's not a "common" enemy. So in the meantime, it's trying to educate one neighbor at every opportunity.....just like you described.