Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part III


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part III

Previous · 1 . . . 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 . . . 29 · Next
Author Message
WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8748
Credit: 25,598,119
RAC: 8,933
United Kingdom
Message 1323885 - Posted: 2 Jan 2013, 22:27:07 UTC - in response to Message 1323820.
Last modified: 2 Jan 2013, 22:40:45 UTC

Going further afield to Europe (ND), I found a price of 320 euros for a 200W framed panel, but min order is 100 and excludes shipping etc.

Exchange rate is ~$1.60 = £1, and $1.30 = 1 euro

Edit] cannot link requires registration and an account.

Edit2] Just seen this, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/9777016/Warren-Buffett-to-build-worlds-largest-solar-energy-project.html

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1323908 - Posted: 2 Jan 2013, 22:40:54 UTC

OK... So first few hits on ebay:

245W Polycrystalline Mono Solar PV Panel: £154.95

250w All Black Ulica Monocrystalline Solar PV Panel: £161.05

36x A grade 6x6 monocrystalline solar cells PV - 135 watts for DIY: £19.01


And a grid inverter:

Fronius IG 20 PV Solar Panel Grid Inverter 2kw: £174.99



The bare cells are a lot less than 50p per Watt!

So, deduct 25% costs or whatever for trade bulk purchase and... Phew!


All on our only one planet,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile dancer42
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Jun 02
Posts: 436
Credit: 1,160,474
RAC: 80
United States
Message 1323982 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 2:45:07 UTC - in response to Message 1323641.

As to the folks on fixed incomes, there are company's in the US that will

lease solar panels to you for 20 years and guarantee a fixed rate for that

period. Something like this could be done for the needy for a 1 time cost

until the battery's need replacing.


Grid connected solar panels do not require batteries. Possible exception might be in the control unit, something along the lines of a motherboard battery.



that is quiet true but then when the grid is down so may be your solar cells.
____________

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1323988 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 3:38:36 UTC - in response to Message 1323982.

If someone is trying to reduce expenses via solar the LAST thing they want to do is incure expenses of battery strings. They are not trying to install backup power, they are trying to lower their consumption from the grid. And giving back to the grid is a GREAT way to do that.
____________

Janice

Profile dancer42
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Jun 02
Posts: 436
Credit: 1,160,474
RAC: 80
United States
Message 1323989 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 3:42:00 UTC

also with mylar mirrors you can double or triple the solar panel output

at the cost of longevity as long as the panels have adequate cooled.

And all these prices are for finished panels.

With a soldering iron a some basic knowledge of electricity and carpentry

you can build your own panels at sustancial savings.

the big point is for every 1630 kwh generated by solar England imports

1 less barrel of foreign oil, so even small installations add up if there are

enough of them.


____________

Profile dancer42
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Jun 02
Posts: 436
Credit: 1,160,474
RAC: 80
United States
Message 1323990 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 3:42:52 UTC - in response to Message 1323988.

If someone is trying to reduce expenses via solar the LAST thing they want to do is incure expenses of battery strings. They are not trying to install backup power, they are trying to lower their consumption from the grid. And giving back to the grid is a GREAT way to do that.






this is vary true point taken.
____________

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,698
RAC: 7,131
United States
Message 1323999 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 4:33:02 UTC - in response to Message 1323988.

If someone is trying to reduce expenses via solar the LAST thing they want to do is incure expenses of battery strings. They are not trying to install backup power, they are trying to lower their consumption from the grid. And giving back to the grid is a GREAT way to do that.

For the individual and only as long as a small percentage of people make that choice. If everyone went to solar then there would be no need of any power on the grid when the sun is shining. Of course at night we would need lots of dirty fossil fuel plants as they are able to ramp up and down output on a dime.

____________

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2592
Credit: 5,389,974
RAC: 3,614
United States
Message 1324001 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 4:46:57 UTC - in response to Message 1323999.

And that would be cleaner than what is currently being done.
____________

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,698
RAC: 7,131
United States
Message 1324012 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 5:31:06 UTC - in response to Message 1324001.

And that would be cleaner than what is currently being done.

But not clean enough.

____________

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1324111 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 14:13:01 UTC - in response to Message 1324012.
Last modified: 3 Jan 2013, 14:21:32 UTC

And that would be cleaner than what is currently being done.

But not clean enough.


Most of the fossil fuel generation currently comes on during prime(day) time.
True it is not clean enough. That is what we need those windmills for on those cold windy nights.

Oh yes, and hydro electric can save their capacity until night time.. and so on.. and so on.. and so on...

Flywheel Storage There are ways to store electricity, and this is one of many.

Again heat can be generated during excess capacity( heat rocks/metal/concrete/whatever) and can be used to generate steam to power generation when needed.

So there really is room for everyone to have solar, and giant solar/wind farms.

What we do not have room for is more fossils.
____________

Janice

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32331
Credit: 14,275,209
RAC: 8,231
United Kingdom
Message 1324127 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 15:31:58 UTC

I still think that for individual personal home use, solar power still doesn't cost in. By the time you have bought the panels, inverter, control gear, special meter to manage feed in rates, installed, assembled, and tested it, it is a lot of money. Are they safe from lightening strikes on the roof, will pigeon mess or dirt affect their performance, do they need cleaning maintenance? The average homeowner doesn't have a roof ladder. And in the UK, how many sunny enough days per year do we get?

The average home computer draws about 300W on its own, electric kettles run at 3000W, one bar electric fires are 1000W. A 250W panel wouldn't be worth installing. In my town there also planning regulations to be taken into consideration as well.

The following limits apply to standalone solar panels:

Should be no higher than four metres
Should be at least 5m from boundaries
Size of array is limited to 9 sq m or 3m wide and 3m deep
Only one stand alone solar installation is permitted.
If your house is in a conservation area and the panels are to be fitted to a building in your garden or grounds they should not be visible from the highway.

You try putting a wind turbine in your back garden - no chance! At present only commercial solar farms seem viable, estuary wave power is too untried, and onshore and offshore wind farms are having much controversy from the NIMBY's. Hydro electric is a good means of energy generation, and at present gives 1.3% into the UK energy mix, but is mainly confined to Scotland, nowhere else in England or Wales is suitable. We just don't have the California desert or Colorado rivers in the UK. but reducing our carbon footprint as much as possible by using renewables wherever we can, is a prime objective.

One day oil, gas, and coal will run out, there are finite reserves of those fuels. For us over here, the only long term way forward is to adopt nuclear power. Three Mile Island in 1979, was because of mechanical failures and inadequate training, Chernobyl in 1986, was because of design faults, and unsafe operating procedures, Fukushima in 2011 was caused by an earthquake followed by a tsunami, that knocked out the emergency generators for the cooling pumps, which were on the ground floor. Political inaction delayed salt water flooding, until it was too late to prevent meltdown.

Lessons from all those have been learnt, and we already have in service nuclear submarines containing power plants with a 30 year life, which are perfectly safe. We just need to scale them up a bit.






Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1324230 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 17:24:06 UTC
Last modified: 3 Jan 2013, 17:26:47 UTC

A few local (UK) consequences for a little anti-fossils pollution motivation:


Met Office: 2012 was UK's second wettest year on record

... Most areas were affected by the extreme weather, with thousands of homes flooded and farmers struggling to grow crops in the saturated soil.

The latest data comes as analysis says the frequency of extreme rainfall in the UK may be increasing. ...

... "The trend towards more extreme rainfall events is one we are seeing around the world, in countries such as India and China, and now potentially here in the UK," ...

... This drastic change was largely attributed to a shift in the position of the jet stream...



Second wettest year in graphics

... In 2012, the jet stream was further south than usual during the summer months, bringing wet and cold weather to much of the country. ...


Extreme rainfall in UK 'increasing'

... Scientists say that as the world has warmed by 0.7C, the atmosphere is able to hold 4% more moisture, which means more potential rain. ...


... And the extent of ice cover across the Arctic in part influences the moisture and heat flow there that then sets the high altitude jet stream on its meanders...

What next as we very soon hit zero Arctic ice in summer?...


("Told you so" is NOT a good scenario... :-( )

All on our only one planet,
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1324243 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 17:39:25 UTC - in response to Message 1324127.

Chris no one is recommending a single panel on a home. The inverter would cost several times over the panel and it just would not make sense.

20 panels at a time? Now that could have a significant impact on someones electric bill. Keep in mind 1 watt*average peak sun*365/1000=KWH per year, typical life expectancy of the panels 20-30 years. At my current high end rate of approx $.33USD per KWH.. it is not hard to make a case for them.

Wind is another matter, and in urban/suburban areas it is difficult to place, though not impossible. There is of course the assumption when trying to get a permit that you want to install 5MW giant towers, when even a 300-500 watt(less than 5 ft diameter) could easily be installed on most roof tops with minimal to no bad effects on your neighbors.

Home wind for many is simply not an option.
____________

Janice

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,698
RAC: 7,131
United States
Message 1324248 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 17:48:24 UTC - in response to Message 1324111.

Flywheel Storage There are ways to store electricity, and this is one of many.

Largest plant 20MW. Single nuclear plant 950-1300MW. I think you have a scale issue here. Also how long can this energy be stored before it all leaks away? Or are you attempting to deny friction. Heat storage has the same issues. Storage as gravity or chemical does not.


____________

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,647,395
RAC: 516
United States
Message 1324262 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 18:20:48 UTC - in response to Message 1324248.

If you note the photos of that plant it appears to be approx. 5 acres.
Friction would be a factor on the flywheel storage, not an overwhelming factor but a factor. For heat storage it is a matter of insulation. a single LARGE object takes a long time to cool. converting to gravity(pumping liquids up I presume? or hoisting large objects to drop later?) does have waste energy involved as well. As does charging batteries(chemical).

But ALL of these methods can and do work.
____________

Janice

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1324405 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 22:56:23 UTC - in response to Message 1324262.

If you note the photos of that plant it appears to be approx. 5 acres.
Friction would be a factor on the flywheel storage, not an overwhelming factor but a factor. ...

Those units operate in a vacuum and with magnetic levitation bearings that makes the friction losses negligible. Impressive stuff. Rather neat and effective.

You can even get them now for replacing large sized battery-backup UPSes.

Rather good and quite a game changer...


All on our only one planet,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8572
Credit: 4,233,683
RAC: 851
United Kingdom
Message 1324408 - Posted: 3 Jan 2013, 23:01:01 UTC - in response to Message 1324230.

A few local (UK) consequences for a little anti-fossils pollution motivation:

And a rather obvious wider consequence previously foretold:


Delay climate mitigation, escalate the costs

... Which would hurt less: a global carbon price of $US20 now, or a $US100 carbon price in 2020?...

... If mitigation steps aren’t taken, the researchers say, global annual emissions by 2020 will reach 55 gigatons of CO2 each year. At that point, IIASA’s Keywan Riahi says, “you would need to shut down a coal power plant each week for ten years if you still wanted to reach the two-degree Celsius target”.

“Fundamentally, it’s a question of how much society is willing to risk,”...




All on our only planet,
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile dancer42
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 2 Jun 02
Posts: 436
Credit: 1,160,474
RAC: 80
United States
Message 1324453 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:04:24 UTC

Here are some other thoughts,solar can also provide heat, insulation is a 1 time

cost, better windows are becoming more affordable,there are a lot of appliances

that run on 12v for the rv or caravan market that can be run directly off of

solar panels with no power inverter.
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2621
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 12
United States
Message 1324455 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 2:12:28 UTC - in response to Message 1324408.

if you still wanted to reach the two-degree Celsius target”.


There is no established causality between CO-2 concentration and air temperature on Earth.

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12995
Credit: 7,664,698
RAC: 7,131
United States
Message 1324465 - Posted: 4 Jan 2013, 4:43:53 UTC - in response to Message 1324405.

If you note the photos of that plant it appears to be approx. 5 acres.
Friction would be a factor on the flywheel storage, not an overwhelming factor but a factor. ...

Those units operate in a vacuum and with magnetic levitation bearings that makes the friction losses negligible. Impressive stuff. Rather neat and effective.

You can even get them now for replacing large sized battery-backup UPSes.

Rather good and quite a game changer...

A few of orders of magnitude to small to be "a game changer" I mean, you aren't going to be able to store much energy when 5 of them fit on a single flat bed trailer.

I was looking for a total storage capacity for a unit but couldn't find it. I see the worlds largest plant was shown as 20MW, but that is load. Didn't say how long it could keep that up. Also it was being talked about for phase synchronization. That is only very momentary in comparison with storing several hours of energy for use when the sun don't shine.

Practical lesson. Gravity stores energy in moving a mass. A rotating object stores its energy in a moving mass. What is the weight of the water that is released by an hour for a medium hydroelectric dam? What is the weight limit of a single flatbed trailer? Are we getting the picture yet?

____________

Previous · 1 . . . 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 . . . 29 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Climate Change, 'Greenhouse' effects, Environment, etc part III

Copyright © 2014 University of California