Google Press Release:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/pressrel/20071127_green.html
Google's Goal: Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal
Creates renewable energy R&D group and supports breakthrough technologies
Mountain View, Calif. (November 27, 2007) – Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced a new strategic initiative to develop electricity from renewable energy sources that will be cheaper than electricity produced from coal. The newly created initiative, known as RE<C, will focus initially on advanced solar thermal power, wind power technologies, enhanced geothermal systems and other potential breakthrough technologies.
WHAT'S SO DAMN ADVANCED ABOUT 1960s TO 1980s TECHNOLOGY?
Google's too cheap even to hire somebody who can fake concern for the environment by even knowing what the "breakthrough technologies" might actually be in the 21st century.
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/altamont-pass-wind-farm.html
Google to Altamont Pass Wind Farm: 49.0 mi – about 51 mins (1970s technology).
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/tehachapi-pass-wind-farm.html
Google to Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm: 301 mi – about 5 hours 0 mins (1980s tech).
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/geothermal-geysers-california.html
Google to the Geysers: 129 mi – about 2 hours 36 mins (1960s technology).
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/solar-thermal-solar-one-and-solar-two.html
Google to Solar One and Solar Two: 396 mi – about 6 hours 23 mins (1982 technology).
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/solar-thermal-kramer-junction-segs-iii.html
Google to Kramer Junction Solar Power Plants: 356 mi – about 5 hours 47 mins (1980s Technology).
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/solar-thermal-harper-lake-segs-viii-and.html
Google Map to Harper Lake - SEGS VIII and IX 374 mi – about 6 hours 24 mins (1989 tech).
http://100-mpg-car.blogspot.com/2007/11/solar-thermal-daggett-segs-1-ii.html
Google to Daggett, California: 398 mi – about 6 hours 26 mins. (1985 Technology).
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Altamont Pass Wind Farm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamont_Pass_Wind_Farm
Google Map to Altamont Pass Wind Farm: 49.0 mi – about 51 mins
The Altamont Pass Wind Farm is one of the earliest in the United States. The wind farm is composed of over 4500 relatively small wind turbines of various types, making it at one time the largest farm in the world in terms of capacity. Altamont Pass is still the largest concentration of wind turbines in the world, producing about 125 MW on average. They were installed after the 1970s energy crisis in response to favorable tax policies for investors.
Considered largely obsolete, these numerous small turbines are being gradually replaced with much larger and more cost-effective units. The small turbines are dangerous to various raptors that hunt California Ground Squirrels in the area. The larger units turn more slowly and, being elevated higher, are less hazardous to the local wildlife.
Google Map to Altamont Pass Wind Farm: 49.0 mi – about 51 mins
The Altamont Pass Wind Farm is one of the earliest in the United States. The wind farm is composed of over 4500 relatively small wind turbines of various types, making it at one time the largest farm in the world in terms of capacity. Altamont Pass is still the largest concentration of wind turbines in the world, producing about 125 MW on average. They were installed after the 1970s energy crisis in response to favorable tax policies for investors.
Considered largely obsolete, these numerous small turbines are being gradually replaced with much larger and more cost-effective units. The small turbines are dangerous to various raptors that hunt California Ground Squirrels in the area. The larger units turn more slowly and, being elevated higher, are less hazardous to the local wildlife.
Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehachapi_Pass_Wind_Farm
Google Map to Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm: 301 mi – about 5 hours 0 mins
The east and south area of the Tehachapi Pass has one of California's larger Wind farms, generating electricity. The turbines have been in place since the early 1980s and have been upgraded through the years. The original wind turbines were much smaller than the much taller and larger new version turbines now sited for use. They are easily seen from State Route 58 and from Tehachapi-Willow Springs Road.
Google Map to Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm: 301 mi – about 5 hours 0 mins
The east and south area of the Tehachapi Pass has one of California's larger Wind farms, generating electricity. The turbines have been in place since the early 1980s and have been upgraded through the years. The original wind turbines were much smaller than the much taller and larger new version turbines now sited for use. They are easily seen from State Route 58 and from Tehachapi-Willow Springs Road.
Geothermal: The Geysers, California
http://www.geysers.com/
Google Map to the Geysers: 129 mi – about 2 hours 36 mins
Largest U.S. Geothermal Plant Licensed in California
March 01, 2004
Photo of The Geysers geothermal plant spouts dry steam in a panoramic view of its northern California surroundings.
Geothermal energy plants in California such as the Geysers (shown), in the northern part of the state, will be joined by a new 185-MW facility near the Sonny Bono Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge in southern California. (Credit: Pacific Gas and Electric Company)
The California Energy Commission voted on December 17 to approve a license for the 185-MW Salton Sea Unit 6 Geothermal Project. Proposed by CE Obsidian Energy, LLC, the project will be the largest geothermal power plant in the country. The facility will be located on 80 acres of land at the southern end of the Sonny Bono Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge, approximately six miles north of Calipatria in Imperial County. For details, see the CEC's December 17 press release.
Google Map to the Geysers: 129 mi – about 2 hours 36 mins
Largest U.S. Geothermal Plant Licensed in California
March 01, 2004
Photo of The Geysers geothermal plant spouts dry steam in a panoramic view of its northern California surroundings.
Geothermal energy plants in California such as the Geysers (shown), in the northern part of the state, will be joined by a new 185-MW facility near the Sonny Bono Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge in southern California. (Credit: Pacific Gas and Electric Company)
The California Energy Commission voted on December 17 to approve a license for the 185-MW Salton Sea Unit 6 Geothermal Project. Proposed by CE Obsidian Energy, LLC, the project will be the largest geothermal power plant in the country. The facility will be located on 80 acres of land at the southern end of the Sonny Bono Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge, approximately six miles north of Calipatria in Imperial County. For details, see the CEC's December 17 press release.
Solar Thermal: Solar One and Solar Two
Solar One and Solar Two
Google Map to Solar One and Solar Two: 396 mi – about 6 hours 23 mins
Solar power towers use thousands of individual sun-tracking mirrors (called heliostats) to reflect solar energy onto a central receiver located on top of a tall tower. The receiver collects the sun's heat in a heat-transfer fluid that flows through the receiver. The U.S. Department of Energy, and a consortium of U.S. utilities and industry, built the first two large-scale, demonstration solar power towers in the desert near Barstow, California.[5]
Solar One operated successfully from 1982 to 1988, proving that power towers work efficiently to produce utility-scale power from sunlight. The Solar One plant used water/steam as the heat-transfer fluid in the receiver; this presented several problems in terms of storage and continuous turbine operation. To address these problems, Solar One was upgraded to Solar Two, which operated from 1996 to 1999. Both systems had the capacity to produce 10 MW of power.[5]
The unique feature of Solar Two was its use of molten salt to capture and store the sun's heat. The very hot salt was stored and used when needed to produce steam to drive a turbine/generator that produces electricity. The system operated smoothly through intermittent clouds and continued generating electricity long into the night.[6]
Solar Two was decommissioned in 1999, and was converted by the University of California, Davis, into an Air Cherenkov Telescope in 2001, measuring gamma rays hitting the atmosphere.
Google Map to Solar One and Solar Two: 396 mi – about 6 hours 23 mins
Solar power towers use thousands of individual sun-tracking mirrors (called heliostats) to reflect solar energy onto a central receiver located on top of a tall tower. The receiver collects the sun's heat in a heat-transfer fluid that flows through the receiver. The U.S. Department of Energy, and a consortium of U.S. utilities and industry, built the first two large-scale, demonstration solar power towers in the desert near Barstow, California.[5]
Solar One operated successfully from 1982 to 1988, proving that power towers work efficiently to produce utility-scale power from sunlight. The Solar One plant used water/steam as the heat-transfer fluid in the receiver; this presented several problems in terms of storage and continuous turbine operation. To address these problems, Solar One was upgraded to Solar Two, which operated from 1996 to 1999. Both systems had the capacity to produce 10 MW of power.[5]
The unique feature of Solar Two was its use of molten salt to capture and store the sun's heat. The very hot salt was stored and used when needed to produce steam to drive a turbine/generator that produces electricity. The system operated smoothly through intermittent clouds and continued generating electricity long into the night.[6]
Solar Two was decommissioned in 1999, and was converted by the University of California, Davis, into an Air Cherenkov Telescope in 2001, measuring gamma rays hitting the atmosphere.
Solar Thermal: Kramer Junction SEGS III, IV, V, VI,VII.
http://www.solel.com/products/pgeneration/ls2/kramerjunction/
Google Map to Kramer Junction Solar Power Plants: 356 mi – about 5 hours 47 mins
The Kramer Junction Company (KJC) is the Managing General Partner of the five 30-Megawatts solar thermal electric generating facilities located in the Mojave Desert at Kramer Junction, California. The designed total combined output of the plants was to be approximately 165 Megawatts at full capacity. Together with its wholly owned subsidiary, KJC Operating Company, KJC operates and manages these facilities (SEGS III-VII).
The Kramer Junction Solar Electric Generating System (SEGS) projects are a series of utility-scale solar thermal electric power plants which were designed and developed in the mid-1980's by LUZ Industries. Solel Solar Systems has improved the efficiency of the HCE technology significantly over the last few years.
The plants operate on solar driven power, to ensure uninterrupted power during peak demand periods. On cloudy days or early evenings, an auxiliary natural gas-fired heater is available and operates to supplement sources of power (the energy supplied by natural gas is limited by regulations to 25% of the total effective annual plant energy input). Operations are constantly monitored and optimized by customized computer controls.
Google Map to Kramer Junction Solar Power Plants: 356 mi – about 5 hours 47 mins
The Kramer Junction Company (KJC) is the Managing General Partner of the five 30-Megawatts solar thermal electric generating facilities located in the Mojave Desert at Kramer Junction, California. The designed total combined output of the plants was to be approximately 165 Megawatts at full capacity. Together with its wholly owned subsidiary, KJC Operating Company, KJC operates and manages these facilities (SEGS III-VII).The Kramer Junction Solar Electric Generating System (SEGS) projects are a series of utility-scale solar thermal electric power plants which were designed and developed in the mid-1980's by LUZ Industries. Solel Solar Systems has improved the efficiency of the HCE technology significantly over the last few years.
The plants operate on solar driven power, to ensure uninterrupted power during peak demand periods. On cloudy days or early evenings, an auxiliary natural gas-fired heater is available and operates to supplement sources of power (the energy supplied by natural gas is limited by regulations to 25% of the total effective annual plant energy input). Operations are constantly monitored and optimized by customized computer controls.
Solar Thermal: Harper Lake - SEGS VIII and IX
http://www.solel.com/products/pgeneration/ls2/harperlake/
Google Map to Harper Lake - SEGS VIII and IX 374 mi – about 6 hours 24 mins
Harper Lake Solar Power Plants- Southern California
Harper Lake, Barstow, California
The two largest solar fields in the world are located at Harper Lake in San Bernadino County Southern California (SEGS VIII and SEGS IX). The plants have a combined electrical capacity of 160 MW.
Luz Industries built the two plants SEGS VIII and IX in 1989 and 1990. These two plants were the last and most advanced to be built. The plants were planned to be larger than the previous seven plants, and to take advantage of the economies of scale. They have operated continuously and have been commercially successful since that time.
Google Map to Harper Lake - SEGS VIII and IX 374 mi – about 6 hours 24 mins
Harper Lake Solar Power Plants- Southern California
Harper Lake, Barstow, California
The two largest solar fields in the world are located at Harper Lake in San Bernadino County Southern California (SEGS VIII and SEGS IX). The plants have a combined electrical capacity of 160 MW.
Luz Industries built the two plants SEGS VIII and IX in 1989 and 1990. These two plants were the last and most advanced to be built. The plants were planned to be larger than the previous seven plants, and to take advantage of the economies of scale. They have operated continuously and have been commercially successful since that time.
Solar Thermal: Daggett SEGS 1 & II
Google to Daggett, California: 398 mi – about 6 hours 26 mins.
http://www.solel.com/products/pgeneration/ls2/daggett/
Solar Thermal: Daggett SEGS 1 & II
Daggett (SEGS 1 & II)
The first two solar power plants of the Solar Electric Generating System (SEGS) were built at Daggett in Southern California about 155 miles northeast of Los Angeles. Constructed by LUZ Industries, the plants use parabolic trough technology and a conventional power cycle to collect solar radiation, which is then converted into useful thermal energy and, subsequently, electricity.
System Description
The basic concept of the SEGS plants is to supply thermal energy via the solar field to produce steam and drive a ?Rankine Cycle? steam turbine, which in turn drives an electric generator to produce power.
The first plant, SEGS 1, was fully operational in 1985 and provided 13.8 MW of power at 585 Deg F. The size of the solar field is 82,960 sq meters. The first type of heat collecting element (HCE) called the LS1 was installed at that plant. This is the first (of three) generations of collecting elements, which were subsequently improved significantly.
The second plant, SEGS II has been continuously operational since 1986. Turbine capacity is 30 MW, and temperature of the HTF reaches 680 Deg F. The size of the field increased to 199,000 Sq Meters. At SEGS 2, two types of Heat collecting assemblies (SCA) are in operation. The LS-1 and the LS-2.
http://www.solel.com/products/pgeneration/ls2/daggett/
Solar Thermal: Daggett SEGS 1 & IIDaggett (SEGS 1 & II)
The first two solar power plants of the Solar Electric Generating System (SEGS) were built at Daggett in Southern California about 155 miles northeast of Los Angeles. Constructed by LUZ Industries, the plants use parabolic trough technology and a conventional power cycle to collect solar radiation, which is then converted into useful thermal energy and, subsequently, electricity.
System Description
The basic concept of the SEGS plants is to supply thermal energy via the solar field to produce steam and drive a ?Rankine Cycle? steam turbine, which in turn drives an electric generator to produce power.
The first plant, SEGS 1, was fully operational in 1985 and provided 13.8 MW of power at 585 Deg F. The size of the solar field is 82,960 sq meters. The first type of heat collecting element (HCE) called the LS1 was installed at that plant. This is the first (of three) generations of collecting elements, which were subsequently improved significantly.
The second plant, SEGS II has been continuously operational since 1986. Turbine capacity is 30 MW, and temperature of the HTF reaches 680 Deg F. The size of the field increased to 199,000 Sq Meters. At SEGS 2, two types of Heat collecting assemblies (SCA) are in operation. The LS-1 and the LS-2.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Which Renewable Energy Technology Do You Want To Work On?
* Hydrogen Tanks
* Hydrogen Pipelines
* EMC PV Furnaces
* Inverters
* Supercaps
* Eagle's Roost Wind Towers
Hydrogen Storage Tanks, essential for fuel cell vehicles and H2-range-extenders for BEVs.
Hydrogen Pipelines that minimize leak hazards, allow and include odorant for leak detection.
Polycrystalline Silicon Casting Furnaces for Solar PV waferstock production.
Inverters for PHEVs and BEVs, and Solar Panels.
Super Capacitors made quick and cheap..
Vertical Axis wind Turbines (VAWTs) in novel bird-safe enclosures.
These are a few of the integratable concepts which create a synergetic web of renewable energy infrastructures.
Which Do You Want To Work On?
Continuing Previous Post: Renewable Energy Cheaper Than Coal
In the previous post I posited the idea that cars serve as storage units for PV energy for deferred use, either as transportation energy or as reconversion to household power electricity.
PV is generated only when the sun shines. Power is used all hours of the day and night. Electric cars can serve as important storage units, either storing electricity as battery power directly, or conversion into hydrogen which can power fuel cell generators.
As a general rule the Continental US (CONUS) gets an average of 5.5 sunny hours per day (more in the sunbelt southwest summers, less in the dreary northeast or northwest winters). Every watt not captured and saved is wasted. Every watt captured and stored is 100% efficient compared to being totally lost. Efficiency of conversion is not any important issue -- convenience of power and costs are the issues.
Solar PV and cars have an identical problem to solve. Conversion of power as DC battery storage requires a device called an inverter for AC power conversion output. Both solar PV panels and electric cars have the same need when AC is the desired output.
Inverters have been expensive, bulky, and heavy. In cars these are undesirable traits, although somewhat less problematic for stationary placement as in PV installations. Improvements for cars translate into improvements for homes, so it is worth further investigations how to solve the probem for cars.
Cars outnumber homes two to one in the US (counting light trucks as part of the fleet). The financial benefit shows up first on cars by reducing the weight,improving the durability, reduction in size and lowering the costs.
Inverters have no real mystery inside. They use less heavy metal than washing machines, less complicated electronics than a $29 CDROM drive. There's no good reason they need to cost in the thousands of dollars. Most of the price reflects "know-how", not materials. Amortized over 200,000,000 cars, the know-how ought to be pennies per unit, and the materials and assembly likewise should be kaizened under $100.
I could do that, and I'm sure I am not unique in that, that many are capable of designing small, reliable, lightweight, cheap inverters.
The weak link in inverters is the capacitors trequired to make smooth sine-waves which integrate into the electrical grid seamlessly without conflict.
Any electric cars made from now on would have a number of supercapacitors included, and models on the road today of some hybrids already have supercaps onboard. With the knowledge and expectation of supercaps being reliably predictably present it is possible to make the rest of the inverters much cheaper.
Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) also require thermal controls for the battery banks, particularly those playing with Lithium batteries, but also even Lead-Acid batteries. Modern 21st century knowledge tells a much different story about batteries than the dark age of prior century practices. You just can't recharge batteries the way they used to and expect them to last any longer than they used to. Prior century battery practices was a prescription for early death for batteries.
21st century batteries will be sealed units installed in the vehicle at manufacture time and never replaced through the life of the car. 15 year batteries are a basic requirement, not a luxury item. That means the average car buyer cannot be trusted to buy the battery charger because they will choose in ignorance last century devices and kill their cars in 5 years just to save some dollars on first costs.
The electric cars then require inverters and chargers both to be inbuilt and both to depend on the proximity of supercaps for their optimal working.
A fuel cell is an electrochemical device which also produces DC current like batteries, like PV panels. A nominal 60 kilowatt fuel cell is equatable to an 80 horsepower engine, not considered very powerful in the automotive world. Fuel cells in the homes could be stationary power plants generating electricity on demand. In 2007 the US average is 24 kWhs consumption per day, being higher in the south, southeast and lower in the northeast corner. That means on average a home uses a kilowatt-hour per hour (more when people are home and active, less when they are out or asleep). A three kilowatt fuel cell is fine for the home with a generous surplus.
A two-car household, which is statistically average (200,000,000 light vehicle fleet, 105,000,000 homes) with 120 kilowatts of fuel cells could power 120 homes for as many hours as they have fuel in the tanks.
A explosion-proof, leakproof, fireproof, vandalism-proof home hydrogen storage is zeolites which use absorption to hold the H2 gas. A concrete lined box of granules similar to powdered detergent grains the size of a cord of wood holds 25 kilograms of H2 gas safely as emergency backup. With about 34 kWhs per kilogram, that's three weeks supply of fuel for a home fuel cell.
Home fuel cells produce electricity, plus heat. The heat may be considered waste heat by many, but the reality is it is more than boiling hot, and hot water is one of the largest users of electricity in the home. Sometimes you want energy purely for the hea, and then the electricity is the waste product -- in the winter northeast the heating bills (gas, fuel oil) far exceed the electric bills.
There are solid economics cases for rapid deployment of hydrogen fuel cells in homes and cars, for residential PV installations, and for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles with fuel cell range extenders. They are a synergistic combination where any advance in technology in any one aids the advances in the others.
----------
There is still an issue which won't go away. The 20th century lifestyles are toxic to the core.
Before 1970 there were no "deadzones" in the oceans. In 1970 the very fertile Mississippi delta (too "fertile" now) was identified first as an anoxic deadzone. BY 1990 there were 75 known around the world. By 2002 there were 150 identified by the UN.
All the scientists of all the countries, all the universities, all the governments in the entire world have never cured or reversed a single one of these deadzones. They are incapable of ever reversing even one because their paradigm is toxic to the core.
There are no technological fixes for toxic lifestyles. If cars were a penny a piece and ran on nothing but fresh air it wouldn't fix the gridlock on the roads, but just make it worse.
You need to fix your paradigm. You need to think of how to live on a planet without killing it.
PV is generated only when the sun shines. Power is used all hours of the day and night. Electric cars can serve as important storage units, either storing electricity as battery power directly, or conversion into hydrogen which can power fuel cell generators.
As a general rule the Continental US (CONUS) gets an average of 5.5 sunny hours per day (more in the sunbelt southwest summers, less in the dreary northeast or northwest winters). Every watt not captured and saved is wasted. Every watt captured and stored is 100% efficient compared to being totally lost. Efficiency of conversion is not any important issue -- convenience of power and costs are the issues.
Solar PV and cars have an identical problem to solve. Conversion of power as DC battery storage requires a device called an inverter for AC power conversion output. Both solar PV panels and electric cars have the same need when AC is the desired output.
Inverters have been expensive, bulky, and heavy. In cars these are undesirable traits, although somewhat less problematic for stationary placement as in PV installations. Improvements for cars translate into improvements for homes, so it is worth further investigations how to solve the probem for cars.
Cars outnumber homes two to one in the US (counting light trucks as part of the fleet). The financial benefit shows up first on cars by reducing the weight,improving the durability, reduction in size and lowering the costs.
Inverters have no real mystery inside. They use less heavy metal than washing machines, less complicated electronics than a $29 CDROM drive. There's no good reason they need to cost in the thousands of dollars. Most of the price reflects "know-how", not materials. Amortized over 200,000,000 cars, the know-how ought to be pennies per unit, and the materials and assembly likewise should be kaizened under $100.
I could do that, and I'm sure I am not unique in that, that many are capable of designing small, reliable, lightweight, cheap inverters.
The weak link in inverters is the capacitors trequired to make smooth sine-waves which integrate into the electrical grid seamlessly without conflict.
Any electric cars made from now on would have a number of supercapacitors included, and models on the road today of some hybrids already have supercaps onboard. With the knowledge and expectation of supercaps being reliably predictably present it is possible to make the rest of the inverters much cheaper.
Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) also require thermal controls for the battery banks, particularly those playing with Lithium batteries, but also even Lead-Acid batteries. Modern 21st century knowledge tells a much different story about batteries than the dark age of prior century practices. You just can't recharge batteries the way they used to and expect them to last any longer than they used to. Prior century battery practices was a prescription for early death for batteries.
21st century batteries will be sealed units installed in the vehicle at manufacture time and never replaced through the life of the car. 15 year batteries are a basic requirement, not a luxury item. That means the average car buyer cannot be trusted to buy the battery charger because they will choose in ignorance last century devices and kill their cars in 5 years just to save some dollars on first costs.
The electric cars then require inverters and chargers both to be inbuilt and both to depend on the proximity of supercaps for their optimal working.
A fuel cell is an electrochemical device which also produces DC current like batteries, like PV panels. A nominal 60 kilowatt fuel cell is equatable to an 80 horsepower engine, not considered very powerful in the automotive world. Fuel cells in the homes could be stationary power plants generating electricity on demand. In 2007 the US average is 24 kWhs consumption per day, being higher in the south, southeast and lower in the northeast corner. That means on average a home uses a kilowatt-hour per hour (more when people are home and active, less when they are out or asleep). A three kilowatt fuel cell is fine for the home with a generous surplus.
A two-car household, which is statistically average (200,000,000 light vehicle fleet, 105,000,000 homes) with 120 kilowatts of fuel cells could power 120 homes for as many hours as they have fuel in the tanks.
A explosion-proof, leakproof, fireproof, vandalism-proof home hydrogen storage is zeolites which use absorption to hold the H2 gas. A concrete lined box of granules similar to powdered detergent grains the size of a cord of wood holds 25 kilograms of H2 gas safely as emergency backup. With about 34 kWhs per kilogram, that's three weeks supply of fuel for a home fuel cell.
Home fuel cells produce electricity, plus heat. The heat may be considered waste heat by many, but the reality is it is more than boiling hot, and hot water is one of the largest users of electricity in the home. Sometimes you want energy purely for the hea, and then the electricity is the waste product -- in the winter northeast the heating bills (gas, fuel oil) far exceed the electric bills.
There are solid economics cases for rapid deployment of hydrogen fuel cells in homes and cars, for residential PV installations, and for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles with fuel cell range extenders. They are a synergistic combination where any advance in technology in any one aids the advances in the others.
----------
There is still an issue which won't go away. The 20th century lifestyles are toxic to the core.
Before 1970 there were no "deadzones" in the oceans. In 1970 the very fertile Mississippi delta (too "fertile" now) was identified first as an anoxic deadzone. BY 1990 there were 75 known around the world. By 2002 there were 150 identified by the UN.
All the scientists of all the countries, all the universities, all the governments in the entire world have never cured or reversed a single one of these deadzones. They are incapable of ever reversing even one because their paradigm is toxic to the core.
There are no technological fixes for toxic lifestyles. If cars were a penny a piece and ran on nothing but fresh air it wouldn't fix the gridlock on the roads, but just make it worse.
You need to fix your paradigm. You need to think of how to live on a planet without killing it.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Introducing Commentary on RE<C
RE<C
http://www.google.com/corporate/green/energy/index.html
Renewable Energy already is cheaper than coal, they just don't "get it" yet.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/science/energy_calculator.html
1 Short Ton = 20,754,000 Btu
22,895 MWhs = 7.812098e+010 BTU = 3,764 tons of coal, roughly one ton of coal every two days, energy-equivalent mined from the sky.
We now have the energy equivalent between coal and Solar PV from cheap polysilicon crystals. What we don't have is an understanding of the difference between PRICE and COST.
Lousey 13% net efficient PV is 12 watts per square foot measured out the panel output. On an acre basis (43,560 square feet) that is 522,720 watt-hours per peak sunny hour, and in all or parts of 8 southwestern states that is 3.136 megawatt-hours per day. Over the 20 year warranty period of modern PV panels that comes to (365 x 20 x 3.136 MWhs) 22,895 MWhs of energy mined from the sky from one acre using cheap polycrystal PV.
PV is going down in price 19% every time the installed base doubles, which was every 3 years from 1979 through 2000. Lately the doubling is closer to every two years but the price has gone up thanks to the Bushite corporate policies which allowed crnering the world market of silicon feedstock by the energy profiteers 9of the Oil & Coal companies. Ironic, isn't it?
Coal and Oil both are also going up. The cost to build a coal plant has nearly doubled in two years. While coal has increased and decreased in local markets, the price generally goes up. The ONLY energy supply that has ever gone down in price has been solar, and in a free-working market with cartel monopoly prosecution for restraint of trade solar would still be going down the steady 19% every doubling.
Solar polycrystal PV is made out of the same stuff that beer bottles and beer cans is made out of: Aluminum and Silicon. When PV is made in the same volumes as beer bottles it will cost the same as beer bottles.
PV is only part of the price equation. It costs a megabuck per mile for wiring to bring megawatts from the hinterlands into city hearts. PV can be mounted in the cities without any of that costs.
PV energy can also be pipelined into town in buried pipes for half the cost of overhead wires in an H2-PV world. The pipes themselves serve as hydrogen storage containers. A 12" diameter pipeline the length of the US Interstate Highway would hold 10 billion kilos of hydrogen at pressures similar to the scuba tanks that people strap on their backs. 10 billion kilos is enough to drive 200,000,000 fuel cell cars from Los Angeles to NYC.
Cars not only convert the hydrogen back to electricity for driving, but can also power the country as a distributed grid. There's 200,000,000 cars and light trucks now, with a 15 year turnover. By as early as 2022 date they could all be plug-in-electric vehicles with V2G capability and hydrogen range-extenders. 72 kWh storage capacity would power all US homes for six days on batteries; each 60 kilowatt fuel cell could power 60 homes for each hour the car has fuel.
People are now trained with laptops and cell phones to plug in every chance they get, and when your car is part of the power grid that keeps the lights on at home, work and school, you can bet people will do it conscientiously. Especially when they are paid for being part of the energy storage grid, they will plug in every chance they see a power plug.
Cars will be integrated into the power grid, but maybe more importantly, they will be joined in a large computer server grid. It takes as much computer power to keep a V2G car synched to the power-grid, buying and selling power while you sleep or work, as it does on your desktop. Parking lots will be large server farms, with 200,000,000 nodes coming on and off.
What does it cost to NOT HAVE ALL THAT? That's the price of coal. It's not what you get, but what you lose that's important in this equation. Coal is just too damn expensive compared to the H2-PV world of V2G cars.
http://www.google.com/corporate/green/energy/index.html
Renewable Energy already is cheaper than coal, they just don't "get it" yet.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/science/energy_calculator.html
1 Short Ton = 20,754,000 Btu
22,895 MWhs = 7.812098e+010 BTU = 3,764 tons of coal, roughly one ton of coal every two days, energy-equivalent mined from the sky.
We now have the energy equivalent between coal and Solar PV from cheap polysilicon crystals. What we don't have is an understanding of the difference between PRICE and COST.
Lousey 13% net efficient PV is 12 watts per square foot measured out the panel output. On an acre basis (43,560 square feet) that is 522,720 watt-hours per peak sunny hour, and in all or parts of 8 southwestern states that is 3.136 megawatt-hours per day. Over the 20 year warranty period of modern PV panels that comes to (365 x 20 x 3.136 MWhs) 22,895 MWhs of energy mined from the sky from one acre using cheap polycrystal PV.
PV is going down in price 19% every time the installed base doubles, which was every 3 years from 1979 through 2000. Lately the doubling is closer to every two years but the price has gone up thanks to the Bushite corporate policies which allowed crnering the world market of silicon feedstock by the energy profiteers 9of the Oil & Coal companies. Ironic, isn't it?
Coal and Oil both are also going up. The cost to build a coal plant has nearly doubled in two years. While coal has increased and decreased in local markets, the price generally goes up. The ONLY energy supply that has ever gone down in price has been solar, and in a free-working market with cartel monopoly prosecution for restraint of trade solar would still be going down the steady 19% every doubling.
Solar polycrystal PV is made out of the same stuff that beer bottles and beer cans is made out of: Aluminum and Silicon. When PV is made in the same volumes as beer bottles it will cost the same as beer bottles.
PV is only part of the price equation. It costs a megabuck per mile for wiring to bring megawatts from the hinterlands into city hearts. PV can be mounted in the cities without any of that costs.
PV energy can also be pipelined into town in buried pipes for half the cost of overhead wires in an H2-PV world. The pipes themselves serve as hydrogen storage containers. A 12" diameter pipeline the length of the US Interstate Highway would hold 10 billion kilos of hydrogen at pressures similar to the scuba tanks that people strap on their backs. 10 billion kilos is enough to drive 200,000,000 fuel cell cars from Los Angeles to NYC.
Cars not only convert the hydrogen back to electricity for driving, but can also power the country as a distributed grid. There's 200,000,000 cars and light trucks now, with a 15 year turnover. By as early as 2022 date they could all be plug-in-electric vehicles with V2G capability and hydrogen range-extenders. 72 kWh storage capacity would power all US homes for six days on batteries; each 60 kilowatt fuel cell could power 60 homes for each hour the car has fuel.
People are now trained with laptops and cell phones to plug in every chance they get, and when your car is part of the power grid that keeps the lights on at home, work and school, you can bet people will do it conscientiously. Especially when they are paid for being part of the energy storage grid, they will plug in every chance they see a power plug.
Cars will be integrated into the power grid, but maybe more importantly, they will be joined in a large computer server grid. It takes as much computer power to keep a V2G car synched to the power-grid, buying and selling power while you sleep or work, as it does on your desktop. Parking lots will be large server farms, with 200,000,000 nodes coming on and off.
What does it cost to NOT HAVE ALL THAT? That's the price of coal. It's not what you get, but what you lose that's important in this equation. Coal is just too damn expensive compared to the H2-PV world of V2G cars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)