The Columbus Dispatch for 27 July 2008 had an article about a proposed wind farm in Champaign County (about 50 mi NW of Columbus). Data were:
130 turbines
$500 million cost
Each turbine will supply 800 homes
From this, I deduce:
Output = 2.3 MW/turbine = 2.9 kW/home
Cost = $3.85 million/turbine = $1.67/watt
This all seems reasonable. In light of other estimates I have seen.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Solar Cost
Paraphrased from: , January 09, 2008
Ann plans to have a solar roof installed. It will be a mini-generator (all of the electricity will go to the grid). She will be receiving 42 cents per kWh over a 20 year term. The current rate she is paying is set by the local utility, Toronto Hydro, and not the province. It is approximately 11 cents per KWh.
The cost for a rated power of 2.34 kW is $22,485 (current exchange rate = 1:1) or $9.59/Watt. The is at the high end of the current price range of $8-10/W.
---------------------------------------------
An ad in Technology Review for July/Aug 2008 by SolFocus states that they will soon be producing photovoltaic for $0.24-0.28/W. and expect the priec to drop by half in two years. Still expensive!!
------------------------------------------
More from Jerry:
You can check these websites for further information:
www.powerauthority.on.ca For further information on the Standard Offer
Contract
www.ontario-sea.org The Ontario Sustainable Energy Association. Their
recent report 'Renewables Without Limits' is the best critique I've read
of the current Standard Offer Contract, and offers a clear overview of
similar programs around the world.
www.wind-works.org Paul Gipe's website. He wrote the OSEA report, is
the acknowledged expert in this field, and the website will keep you
up-to-date on developments in the USofA. Paul can be a great help to you,
his email address is pgipe@igc.org.
Ann plans to have a solar roof installed. It will be a mini-generator (all of the electricity will go to the grid). She will be receiving 42 cents per kWh over a 20 year term. The current rate she is paying is set by the local utility, Toronto Hydro, and not the province. It is approximately 11 cents per KWh.
The cost for a rated power of 2.34 kW is $22,485 (current exchange rate = 1:1) or $9.59/Watt. The is at the high end of the current price range of $8-10/W.
---------------------------------------------
An ad in Technology Review for July/Aug 2008 by SolFocus states that they will soon be producing photovoltaic for $0.24-0.28/W. and expect the priec to drop by half in two years. Still expensive!!
------------------------------------------
More from Jerry:
You can check these websites for further information:
www.powerauthority.on.ca For further information on the Standard Offer
Contract
www.ontario-sea.org The Ontario Sustainable Energy Association. Their
recent report 'Renewables Without Limits' is the best critique I've read
of the current Standard Offer Contract, and offers a clear overview of
similar programs around the world.
www.wind-works.org Paul Gipe's website. He wrote the OSEA report, is
the acknowledged expert in this field, and the website will keep you
up-to-date on developments in the USofA. Paul can be a great help to you,
his email address is pgipe@igc.org.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Wind Over-power
I saw an ad in Smithsonian (July 2008) for wind power. They claim that the US has 18GW, enough for 5 million households. This amounts to 3.6kW per household.
At the same time technologyreview.com reported that a waste to energy plant in Ottawa will produce 21MW per day, enough to power 19,000 homes - i.e. 1.1 kW per home. Lacking a better estimate, I'm assuming that other steady burners (coal and nuclear) also produce 1.1 kW per household.
The reason for this difference is that the wind doesn't always blow; storage batteries can be charged when the turbine produces more electricity than is needed. Even so, wind is not yet a reasonable source for a steady 24/7 electric supply.
At the same time technologyreview.com reported that a waste to energy plant in Ottawa will produce 21MW per day, enough to power 19,000 homes - i.e. 1.1 kW per home. Lacking a better estimate, I'm assuming that other steady burners (coal and nuclear) also produce 1.1 kW per household.
The reason for this difference is that the wind doesn't always blow; storage batteries can be charged when the turbine produces more electricity than is needed. Even so, wind is not yet a reasonable source for a steady 24/7 electric supply.
Friday, July 4, 2008
Solar Opposition - Further to 20 June
According to AP (15 June 2008) there is opposition to an electric transmission line connecting proposed renewable electricity sources (solar, wind, geothermal) through the desert to San Diego. Apparently, it would 'ruin' the desert scenery.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Computer Electricity Use
Peg heard a story on the radio about an elementary student who found that his family could save $1 per day by turning off the family’s computer at night. Not only did he get an A in this science project, but the school system realized that they could save a lot of money by turning off their 500 computers after school. This sounds a little fishy. Our LWVO survey finds that just abut all schools turn off things not in use. Also $1 per day electricity savings seem huge; this is the cost of about 10 kWh. If the turn-off is for 10 hours, their system uses about 1kW.
I decided to check. Here are the data from The Texas Office of Risk Management:
Computer -------------- ----------------------- 250 watts
Monitor ----------------- -----------------------150 watts
Speakers --------------------------------------- 15 watts
Electric stapler ---------------------------------- 25 watts
Scanner ---------------------------------------- 150 watts
HP Laser Jet 4 Printer (Idle) ------------------- 250 watts
(Printing) ---------------1,175 watts
Total 840 watts when idle
1,765 watts when printing
It appears that the student’s estimate may not be far off. However, $1/day = $30/month is almost our entire electric bill.
We don’t have an electric stapler and our scanner is off when not in use. Furthermore, we have an ink-jet printer, which takes mush less energy than a laser. I figure that our system uses maybe 400-450 watts for 16 hours per day or around 200 kWh per month. which is maybe half of our electric bill. Still a lot!!
I decided to check. Here are the data from The Texas Office of Risk Management:
Computer -------------- ----------------------- 250 watts
Monitor ----------------- -----------------------150 watts
Speakers --------------------------------------- 15 watts
Electric stapler ---------------------------------- 25 watts
Scanner ---------------------------------------- 150 watts
HP Laser Jet 4 Printer (Idle) ------------------- 250 watts
(Printing) ---------------1,175 watts
Total 840 watts when idle
1,765 watts when printing
It appears that the student’s estimate may not be far off. However, $1/day = $30/month is almost our entire electric bill.
We don’t have an electric stapler and our scanner is off when not in use. Furthermore, we have an ink-jet printer, which takes mush less energy than a laser. I figure that our system uses maybe 400-450 watts for 16 hours per day or around 200 kWh per month. which is maybe half of our electric bill. Still a lot!!
Friday, June 20, 2008
Opposition to Projects
Several weeks ago I read a story by a Baltimore Sun reporter about two proposed energy projects in Maryland. One is for a third nuclear plant at Calvert Cliffs, on the Eastern shore of Chesapeake Bay. The locals strongly support the project. Their view is that the current nuclear plants have brought good jobs to town and pay large taxes. There is no discernible effect on the health of plant employees as well as the general population. Their case is strengthened by the large reduction in greenhouse gasses associated nuclear energy and the excellent safety record of US nuclear plants. Opposition to the new plant comes from out of town and uses the general anti-nuclear arguments. As of today the project is going ahead.
The second proposed project was a wind farm in Garrett County, the westernmost county in Maryland. The turbines would have been built on state land in this mountainous region. Here the roles were switched. Out-of-towners thought it a great idea, but the locals strongly opposed it. They argued that Garrett County is a tourist region and the towers would spoil the scenery. Also, there was opposition to chopping down trees for the project. In the end the Governor canceled the project.
My reaction was the we will never fight climate change if everybody mounts his particular hobby horse.
The second proposed project was a wind farm in Garrett County, the westernmost county in Maryland. The turbines would have been built on state land in this mountainous region. Here the roles were switched. Out-of-towners thought it a great idea, but the locals strongly opposed it. They argued that Garrett County is a tourist region and the towers would spoil the scenery. Also, there was opposition to chopping down trees for the project. In the end the Governor canceled the project.
My reaction was the we will never fight climate change if everybody mounts his particular hobby horse.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Gasoline Usage
It was recently reported that Americans drove six billion fewer miles over a six-month period. There are 245 million motor vehicles in the US, of which 155 million are cars. If we consider both cars and trucks, the average mileage is about 17 mpg. So the average vehicle drove about 24 miles less over the six-month period and saved a little under 1-1/2 gal of gas.
Other statistics:
Americans used about 136 billion gallons of gas last year or about 550 gal/vehicle.
They also used about 7 billion gallons of ethanol.
Other statistics:
Americans used about 136 billion gallons of gas last year or about 550 gal/vehicle.
They also used about 7 billion gallons of ethanol.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
