|
Highland Ham wrote:
Last month I went to Palm springs for the Faire, and there was no noticeable difference in the numbers of windmills in operation. ===================== Having seen these machines near Palm Springs ,they seem to be rather small and of an older design. Rather small?!!!! You call 350kW or more with blades 150 Feet (45m) long *SMALL*???? Modern machines are much bigger (up to 2 MW rated capacity) and more reliable. Even bigger! In the Netherlands they are now planning a number of 2MW machines offshore ,approx 8 kms off the coast placed on seabed based stuctures. Their designers are focussing on minimum maintenance ( only once every 3 years) . To date land based machines produce on average only 16% of their rated capacity ,due to periods without adequate wind and to technical outage / maintenance. Yet they seem profitable. In the Netherlands many farmers have them on their land ,especially in the northern provinces. I'd like to know what has to be done to get the generated power back into the grid. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH |
Winfield Hill wrote:
Highland Ham wrote... Having seen these machines near Palm Springs, they seem to be rather small and of an older design. I wonder if they shouldn't be replaced, that's prime wind territory. Well, you know that the coops or companies that built them had to invest heavily and borrow money to finance their construction. What makes you think they can just tear down the old ones before they've paid off their loans, and borrow even more heavily to finance new ones?? In the Netherlands many farmers have them on their land, especially in the northern provinces. Do they rent the space to the wind-generator owners, or do they each install and maintain them themselves? Is there a subsidized rate for the sale of electricity to the grid? Thanks, - Win whill_at_picovolt-dot-com |
Winfield Hill wrote:
Highland Ham wrote... Having seen these machines near Palm Springs, they seem to be rather small and of an older design. I wonder if they shouldn't be replaced, that's prime wind territory. Well, you know that the coops or companies that built them had to invest heavily and borrow money to finance their construction. What makes you think they can just tear down the old ones before they've paid off their loans, and borrow even more heavily to finance new ones?? In the Netherlands many farmers have them on their land, especially in the northern provinces. Do they rent the space to the wind-generator owners, or do they each install and maintain them themselves? Is there a subsidized rate for the sale of electricity to the grid? Thanks, - Win whill_at_picovolt-dot-com |
"Roger Gt" wrote in message . com... READ, it will inform you! That's pretty funny. |
"Roger Gt" wrote in message . com... READ, it will inform you! That's pretty funny. |
In article , box
says... KR Williams wrote: In article , says... On a sunny day (Thu, 15 Apr 2004 05:57:18 GMT) it happened wrote in : ...snip... Add that in, and the cost of a $15000 system is much worse - over 30,000 in a 25 year, 7% mortgage. You have to take into account that the cost of a kWh from the grid in 25 years will be a LOT higher too, if there still is a grid during and after WW3 that is. That's silly economics. I do not have to take into account the cost of electricity in 25 years. I can wait. Solar cells are becoming cheaper too. When the cost of the solar cell is less than the cost of power from the grid I can switch, saving all of the negative amortization inbetween, and have a *new* system in 25 years, just as you're in need of replacing yours. ;-) My guess though, is that solar cells for the individual will never become cheaper than power from the grid, since the power company has access to the same technology and a *lot* better financing possibilities. ...and they don't have to have the pay- back in my lifetime. They have access to the tech, BUT, they also have to maintain the distribution system. Since my electricity has been unbundled, roughly half of my cost per Kwh goes to the distribution co., not the producer. Ice storms, drunk drivers, blown line fuses all cost money. As well as the personel and associated benefits packages, transportation costs of materials, etc. for maintaining the lines. All this is avoided cost on home solar. There is still a huge advantage of scale. Without the grid you'll have to store your own energy, which is certainly not free. Peak energy usage is not near peak insolation. And... www.solaraccess.com/news/story?storyid=6482 talking about a new discovery: "A solar cell with the simplest possible physical structure could achieve 50 percent efficiency or better, far higher than any yet demonstrated in the laboratory." Irrelevant. The large producers will have any technology you will, first and on a much more massive scale. It isn't cost effective for most of us yet, but the tipping point is coming. So is the end of the oil reserves. It's been coming twenty years from now, for about a hundred years. The tipping point will certainly come, but the large generators will make it there before your ****-ant house will. -- Keith |
KR Williams wrote:
In article , box says... It isn't cost effective for most of us yet, but the tipping point is coming. So is the end of the oil reserves. It's been coming twenty years from now, for about a hundred years. The tipping point will certainly come, but the large generators will make it there before your ****-ant house will. I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Anthony |
KR Williams wrote:
In article , box says... It isn't cost effective for most of us yet, but the tipping point is coming. So is the end of the oil reserves. It's been coming twenty years from now, for about a hundred years. The tipping point will certainly come, but the large generators will make it there before your ****-ant house will. I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Anthony |
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 00:11:09 +0100, "Highland Ham"
wrote: To date land based machines produce on average only 16% of their rated capacity ,due to periods without adequate wind and to technical outage / maintenance. Yet they seem profitable. In the Netherlands many farmers have them on their land ,especially in the northern provinces. Those 16 % rated capacity figures seems to be quite low, since usually 20-30 % is quoted for land based windmills near the coast over here. Of course, if you use a too big generator for a particular place and wing size, the percentage will go down. If you use a smaller generator with the same turbine and same location, the percentage will go up, however, during stronger winds you can only utilise the amount of power as the generator is rated for and some of the wind energy is "lost" during stronger winds compared to a larger generator. During system design, you can select the percentage by selecting the generator size. The generator cost compared to the other costs of the windmill will determine the most economical generator size and thus also this percentage. Paul OH3LWR |
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 00:11:09 +0100, "Highland Ham"
wrote: To date land based machines produce on average only 16% of their rated capacity ,due to periods without adequate wind and to technical outage / maintenance. Yet they seem profitable. In the Netherlands many farmers have them on their land ,especially in the northern provinces. Those 16 % rated capacity figures seems to be quite low, since usually 20-30 % is quoted for land based windmills near the coast over here. Of course, if you use a too big generator for a particular place and wing size, the percentage will go down. If you use a smaller generator with the same turbine and same location, the percentage will go up, however, during stronger winds you can only utilise the amount of power as the generator is rated for and some of the wind energy is "lost" during stronger winds compared to a larger generator. During system design, you can select the percentage by selecting the generator size. The generator cost compared to the other costs of the windmill will determine the most economical generator size and thus also this percentage. Paul OH3LWR |
"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message ... .... I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. The cells may last 100 years, but the inverters, storage batteries and the like, are more typically 5-10 years. And, many of us do not live where sunlight is all that reliable. The more unreliable, the larger and more expensive the system that is required, and the more severe compromises have to be made to keep the night light on. The PV systems, to obtain maximum practical usage for the civilization as a whole, need to be installed in mass in the desert regions down in the temperate zones in the us, Texas and like that. This puts the big power companies in the cat bird seat, still. But it is that, or pay 3-4 times as much for the same electricity from a system that gives you constant headaches maintaining yourself, and one that may actually consume more power to build and install than it can produce in it's life, because we insist on living where we want instead of where solar power pays off. |
"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message ... .... I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. The cells may last 100 years, but the inverters, storage batteries and the like, are more typically 5-10 years. And, many of us do not live where sunlight is all that reliable. The more unreliable, the larger and more expensive the system that is required, and the more severe compromises have to be made to keep the night light on. The PV systems, to obtain maximum practical usage for the civilization as a whole, need to be installed in mass in the desert regions down in the temperate zones in the us, Texas and like that. This puts the big power companies in the cat bird seat, still. But it is that, or pay 3-4 times as much for the same electricity from a system that gives you constant headaches maintaining yourself, and one that may actually consume more power to build and install than it can produce in it's life, because we insist on living where we want instead of where solar power pays off. |
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:18:45 -0700, Anthony Matonak
wrote: [snip] I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Anthony Sure they do. While you are dicking around with solar cells the big power companies will build a solar-powered steam plant with *huge* servo'd mirrors. I put pencil-to-paper once upon a time... you can do marvelously if you've got the acreage. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:18:45 -0700, Anthony Matonak
wrote: [snip] I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Anthony Sure they do. While you are dicking around with solar cells the big power companies will build a solar-powered steam plant with *huge* servo'd mirrors. I put pencil-to-paper once upon a time... you can do marvelously if you've got the acreage. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
Anthony Matonak wrote:
KR Williams wrote: In article , box says... It isn't cost effective for most of us yet, but the tipping point is coming. So is the end of the oil reserves. It's been coming twenty years from now, for about a hundred years. Your _doomsday_ assertion that oil reserves are ending is totally ridiculous. There are a zillion gallons of oil locked up in shale in North America, just waiting for an economical way to extract them. Problem is, they cost too much to extract, so that's not practical _at_this_time_. But if the price of petroleum continues to go up, then finally someday the point will come where the cost to extract it *is* competitive. Then it will get included in reserves. Another possibility is that if the cost of petroleum continues to rise, the cost of alternative energy sources may become more competitive, and will replace petroleum. Alcohol from corn is one that comes to mind. Maybe if the cost of gas goes up another buck or so, I'll be able to drive down the street without having to fight so much traffic. All those gas guzzling vehicles will drive their owners to the poorhouse and they'll stay off the roads. ;-) The tipping point will certainly come, but the large generators will make it there before your ****-ant house will. I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Anthony |
Anthony Matonak wrote:
KR Williams wrote: In article , box says... It isn't cost effective for most of us yet, but the tipping point is coming. So is the end of the oil reserves. It's been coming twenty years from now, for about a hundred years. Your _doomsday_ assertion that oil reserves are ending is totally ridiculous. There are a zillion gallons of oil locked up in shale in North America, just waiting for an economical way to extract them. Problem is, they cost too much to extract, so that's not practical _at_this_time_. But if the price of petroleum continues to go up, then finally someday the point will come where the cost to extract it *is* competitive. Then it will get included in reserves. Another possibility is that if the cost of petroleum continues to rise, the cost of alternative energy sources may become more competitive, and will replace petroleum. Alcohol from corn is one that comes to mind. Maybe if the cost of gas goes up another buck or so, I'll be able to drive down the street without having to fight so much traffic. All those gas guzzling vehicles will drive their owners to the poorhouse and they'll stay off the roads. ;-) The tipping point will certainly come, but the large generators will make it there before your ****-ant house will. I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Anthony |
Fred B. McGalliard wrote:
"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. Big power companies have to buy the same parts as individuals and would mostly pay similar prices. The large infrastructure to build and maintain them is called "the rest of civilization" for the most part and is accessible for an individual as it is for a big power company. The cells may last 100 years, but the inverters, storage batteries and the like, are more typically 5-10 years. And, many of us do not live where sunlight is all that reliable. The more unreliable, the larger and more expensive the system that is required, and the more severe compromises have to be made to keep the night light on. The PV systems, to obtain maximum practical usage for the civilization as a whole, need to be installed in mass in the desert regions down in the temperate zones in the us, Texas and like that. This puts the big power companies in the cat bird seat, still. Oddly enough, many people do live where the sunlight is fairly reliable and a PV system can be small enough to be practical for an individual. The civilization as a whole is just a collection of individuals when you look at it closely enough. But it is that, or pay 3-4 times as much for the same electricity from a system that gives you constant headaches maintaining yourself, and one that may actually consume more power to build and install than it can produce in it's life, because we insist on living where we want instead of where solar power pays off. Grid tied systems need close to zero maintenance so I hardly see that as giving constant headaches. Even with a battery system, I've heard about some that only require a checkup every six months or so. Lastly, while PV may be more expensive than grid power, I don't think that a big power company can build solar PV all that much cheaper than anyone else. Anthony |
Fred B. McGalliard wrote:
"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. Big power companies have to buy the same parts as individuals and would mostly pay similar prices. The large infrastructure to build and maintain them is called "the rest of civilization" for the most part and is accessible for an individual as it is for a big power company. The cells may last 100 years, but the inverters, storage batteries and the like, are more typically 5-10 years. And, many of us do not live where sunlight is all that reliable. The more unreliable, the larger and more expensive the system that is required, and the more severe compromises have to be made to keep the night light on. The PV systems, to obtain maximum practical usage for the civilization as a whole, need to be installed in mass in the desert regions down in the temperate zones in the us, Texas and like that. This puts the big power companies in the cat bird seat, still. Oddly enough, many people do live where the sunlight is fairly reliable and a PV system can be small enough to be practical for an individual. The civilization as a whole is just a collection of individuals when you look at it closely enough. But it is that, or pay 3-4 times as much for the same electricity from a system that gives you constant headaches maintaining yourself, and one that may actually consume more power to build and install than it can produce in it's life, because we insist on living where we want instead of where solar power pays off. Grid tied systems need close to zero maintenance so I hardly see that as giving constant headaches. Even with a battery system, I've heard about some that only require a checkup every six months or so. Lastly, while PV may be more expensive than grid power, I don't think that a big power company can build solar PV all that much cheaper than anyone else. Anthony |
"Jim Thompson" wrote in message ... While you are dicking around with solar cells the big power companies will build a solar-powered steam plant with *huge* servo'd mirrors. I put pencil-to-paper once upon a time... you can do marvelously if you've got the acreage. They already have. http://www.volker-quaschning.de/downloads/VGB2001.pdf Scroll down to page 5. |
"Jim Thompson" wrote in message ... While you are dicking around with solar cells the big power companies will build a solar-powered steam plant with *huge* servo'd mirrors. I put pencil-to-paper once upon a time... you can do marvelously if you've got the acreage. They already have. http://www.volker-quaschning.de/downloads/VGB2001.pdf Scroll down to page 5. |
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 10:14:31 -0700, "Richard Henry"
wrote: "Jim Thompson" wrote in message .. . While you are dicking around with solar cells the big power companies will build a solar-powered steam plant with *huge* servo'd mirrors. I put pencil-to-paper once upon a time... you can do marvelously if you've got the acreage. They already have. http://www.volker-quaschning.de/downloads/VGB2001.pdf Scroll down to page 5. Arizona Public Service has a similar operating facility west of Phoenix that, for some reason, is kept very hush-hush. It was in the papers a few years ago, then no more mention. The efficiency of such a system FAR exceeds what will EVER be attained with photo cells. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 10:14:31 -0700, "Richard Henry"
wrote: "Jim Thompson" wrote in message .. . While you are dicking around with solar cells the big power companies will build a solar-powered steam plant with *huge* servo'd mirrors. I put pencil-to-paper once upon a time... you can do marvelously if you've got the acreage. They already have. http://www.volker-quaschning.de/downloads/VGB2001.pdf Scroll down to page 5. Arizona Public Service has a similar operating facility west of Phoenix that, for some reason, is kept very hush-hush. It was in the papers a few years ago, then no more mention. The efficiency of such a system FAR exceeds what will EVER be attained with photo cells. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. |
"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message ... .... I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. Big power companies have to buy the same parts as individuals and would mostly pay similar prices. The large infrastructure to build and maintain them is called "the rest of civilization" for the most part and is accessible for an individual as it is for a big power company. So, first you have to build and support a huge civilization, not stand alone as an individual. Big point that. The power company would buy in really large blocks, install in a single area without pre-existing structures in the way. I would be surprised if their PV installed cost were (assuming they are in this for profit not subsidies) any more than a third what the individual must suffer. Of course a skilled do it yourselfer with time to hunt up bargains might do a lot better, but this has to apply to the whole people, not just the few. .... Oddly enough, many people do live where the sunlight is fairly reliable and a PV system can be small enough to be practical for an individual. The civilization as a whole is just a collection of individuals when you look at it closely enough. I am not saying that an individual cannot spend an arm and a leg, buy a system that is three times the size of an optimized well sited system, overwhelm everything with massive and expensive battery storage, and be perfectly happy with running out of power in the middle of microwaving his hot dogs, but you gotta recognize that overall this process needs to be made as inexpensive as possible or it will make most of us a lot poorer. I am concerned that you are seeing that a PV system can be built, but not what the trade offs of this system imply to our lives. I believe that when PV electricity becomes cheaper than coal/natural gas/uranium, (if it can), then most of us will be buying most of our electricity from huge PV arrays in the southern deserts, not from a little farm outside our town. There will be few who will "roll their own", and some small town back up plants for summer peaks and such, but the bulk power has to be the cheap power and that has to be large and in the right place to make solar power. .... Grid tied systems need close to zero maintenance so I hardly see that as giving constant headaches. Even with a battery system, I've heard about some that only require a checkup every six months or so. Lastly, while PV may be more expensive than grid power, I don't think that a big power company can build solar PV all that much cheaper than anyone else. Grid tie is great for a small system or two. If we get more than 20% from such systems, the grid has to be redesigned to be a storage system of sorts. I overstated what I think is the actual level of difficulty to get you to think about the demand you are making on the ordinary citizen to maintain his private power system. Every few years he has something break down, and he knows nothing about it. The maintenance costs eat his profit for dinner. A tree branch, an ice storm, a battery failure, a lightening bolt, and his system is disconnected from the grid so he can turn his lights on, and we are back to the centralized distributions system. Your last point, that you think a big company can not build PV much cheaper than Joe, and the general implication that the cost to Joe of electricity from his local PV system is competitive with ConEd from the Mohave Desert by way of the grid, needs a lot more quantification I think. As I recall there is around a 3 to 1 difference in the average solar insolation between Seattle and Phoenix, for example. It is pretty hard to make up for that kind of a cost differential, but on top of that you have to add even more storage someplace for all that electricity, since the winter insolation up here is really crappy for months on end. That is one heck of a lot of storage, and to do it locally is generally from hard to impossible. (In Seattle we might be able to find a nearby mountain valley we could turn into a lake for hydrostorage, but a lot of locations are a long ways from any possible storage site). . |
"Anthony Matonak" wrote in message ... .... I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. Big power companies have to buy the same parts as individuals and would mostly pay similar prices. The large infrastructure to build and maintain them is called "the rest of civilization" for the most part and is accessible for an individual as it is for a big power company. So, first you have to build and support a huge civilization, not stand alone as an individual. Big point that. The power company would buy in really large blocks, install in a single area without pre-existing structures in the way. I would be surprised if their PV installed cost were (assuming they are in this for profit not subsidies) any more than a third what the individual must suffer. Of course a skilled do it yourselfer with time to hunt up bargains might do a lot better, but this has to apply to the whole people, not just the few. .... Oddly enough, many people do live where the sunlight is fairly reliable and a PV system can be small enough to be practical for an individual. The civilization as a whole is just a collection of individuals when you look at it closely enough. I am not saying that an individual cannot spend an arm and a leg, buy a system that is three times the size of an optimized well sited system, overwhelm everything with massive and expensive battery storage, and be perfectly happy with running out of power in the middle of microwaving his hot dogs, but you gotta recognize that overall this process needs to be made as inexpensive as possible or it will make most of us a lot poorer. I am concerned that you are seeing that a PV system can be built, but not what the trade offs of this system imply to our lives. I believe that when PV electricity becomes cheaper than coal/natural gas/uranium, (if it can), then most of us will be buying most of our electricity from huge PV arrays in the southern deserts, not from a little farm outside our town. There will be few who will "roll their own", and some small town back up plants for summer peaks and such, but the bulk power has to be the cheap power and that has to be large and in the right place to make solar power. .... Grid tied systems need close to zero maintenance so I hardly see that as giving constant headaches. Even with a battery system, I've heard about some that only require a checkup every six months or so. Lastly, while PV may be more expensive than grid power, I don't think that a big power company can build solar PV all that much cheaper than anyone else. Grid tie is great for a small system or two. If we get more than 20% from such systems, the grid has to be redesigned to be a storage system of sorts. I overstated what I think is the actual level of difficulty to get you to think about the demand you are making on the ordinary citizen to maintain his private power system. Every few years he has something break down, and he knows nothing about it. The maintenance costs eat his profit for dinner. A tree branch, an ice storm, a battery failure, a lightening bolt, and his system is disconnected from the grid so he can turn his lights on, and we are back to the centralized distributions system. Your last point, that you think a big company can not build PV much cheaper than Joe, and the general implication that the cost to Joe of electricity from his local PV system is competitive with ConEd from the Mohave Desert by way of the grid, needs a lot more quantification I think. As I recall there is around a 3 to 1 difference in the average solar insolation between Seattle and Phoenix, for example. It is pretty hard to make up for that kind of a cost differential, but on top of that you have to add even more storage someplace for all that electricity, since the winter insolation up here is really crappy for months on end. That is one heck of a lot of storage, and to do it locally is generally from hard to impossible. (In Seattle we might be able to find a nearby mountain valley we could turn into a lake for hydrostorage, but a lot of locations are a long ways from any possible storage site). . |
"Roger Gt" wrote in message . com... Manhattan Island was "Bought" for $24.00 worth of beads, from Indians who thought it strange that anyone would ask to "Buy" anything, but they took the beads! The fact that the colonists were willing to pay anything of value implies that they ecognized the origianl inhabitants claim to the land The only thing Indians "Owned" was a franchise to build Casinos!!! I have some questions about your history books: How many pictures are on each page? 1, 4, or 8? Are they precolored, or do you have to use your crayons? Is some of the text in balloons or is it all in the captions? |
"Roger Gt" wrote in message . com... Manhattan Island was "Bought" for $24.00 worth of beads, from Indians who thought it strange that anyone would ask to "Buy" anything, but they took the beads! The fact that the colonists were willing to pay anything of value implies that they ecognized the origianl inhabitants claim to the land The only thing Indians "Owned" was a franchise to build Casinos!!! I have some questions about your history books: How many pictures are on each page? 1, 4, or 8? Are they precolored, or do you have to use your crayons? Is some of the text in balloons or is it all in the captions? |
"Jim Thompson" wrote in message ... .... The efficiency of such a system FAR exceeds what will EVER be attained with photo cells. I won't take that without a bit of study. The solar cells take a scads of energy to build, but once built run for a very long time without much maintenance. The thermal system is mechanically more complex, requires a lot more maintenance, is more sensitive to wind loading, and of course you are running pretty cool so the thermal efficiency is not all that great. I would think the solar trough is more like 20% and probably much closer to PV than you allude. The very large focusing arrays can run a lot hotter, and may then give you a bit better efficiency, but you are still not likely to make much over 40% and even at that, if you add in the higher rates of "dead" space that the big focusing arrays use, you may find the total percentage of energy recovered per square mile to be under 20%. The cost per KWH recovered is, I think, the killer here, and the increased maintenance adds a lot to this cost for the thermal array. |
"Jim Thompson" wrote in message ... .... The efficiency of such a system FAR exceeds what will EVER be attained with photo cells. I won't take that without a bit of study. The solar cells take a scads of energy to build, but once built run for a very long time without much maintenance. The thermal system is mechanically more complex, requires a lot more maintenance, is more sensitive to wind loading, and of course you are running pretty cool so the thermal efficiency is not all that great. I would think the solar trough is more like 20% and probably much closer to PV than you allude. The very large focusing arrays can run a lot hotter, and may then give you a bit better efficiency, but you are still not likely to make much over 40% and even at that, if you add in the higher rates of "dead" space that the big focusing arrays use, you may find the total percentage of energy recovered per square mile to be under 20%. The cost per KWH recovered is, I think, the killer here, and the increased maintenance adds a lot to this cost for the thermal array. |
Roger Gt wrote:
The Indians would war on their Neighbors for anything they wanted. Kill anyone who resisted and sell prisoners into slavery. Thanks, I wondered where the USA learnt to do that. Made a fine art of it now, haven't they? |
Roger Gt wrote:
The Indians would war on their Neighbors for anything they wanted. Kill anyone who resisted and sell prisoners into slavery. Thanks, I wondered where the USA learnt to do that. Made a fine art of it now, haven't they? |
Anthony Matonak wrote:
Fred B. McGalliard wrote: "Anthony Matonak" wrote in message I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. [snip] The point is not whether or not they can be used, but whether or not they can be used economically and profitably. |
Anthony Matonak wrote:
Fred B. McGalliard wrote: "Anthony Matonak" wrote in message I think the main point is that solar PV is a technology that does not require massive infrastructure. It's something that can be done on an individual and distributed basis. The big power companies really don't have that much advantage over individuals. Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. [snip] The point is not whether or not they can be used, but whether or not they can be used economically and profitably. |
Watson A.Name \"Watt Sun - the Dark Remover\" wrote:
Anthony Matonak wrote: Fred B. McGalliard wrote: Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. [snip] The point is not whether or not they can be used, but whether or not they can be used economically and profitably. Oh, if that was the point then it's already been decided. Right now, solar PV is not economical or profitable except in niche applications not connected to the grid. Tomorrow... who knows? It does seem to be getting cheaper all the time. This, of course, has nothing to do with the question of "Is the profitable use of solar PV limited to big mega-corporations?" If we go back a couple of articles in this thread... KR Williams wrote: In article , box says... KR Williams wrote: My guess though, is that solar cells for the individual will never become cheaper than power from the grid, since the power company has access to the same technology and a *lot* better financing possibilities. ...and they don't have to have the pay- back in my lifetime. They have access to the tech, BUT, they also have to maintain the distribution system. ... All this is avoided cost on home solar. There is still a huge advantage of scale. Some technologies simply can not be affordably implemented on a small homeowner scale and for them to be used you need a big company or co-op. Solar PV is not in that category. The example of a solar powered radio shows this. It does not require huge resources to build, buy or maintain. The basic idea is that when it comes to solar PV installations there really isn't much advantage of scale. A huge installation will cost only slightly less per watt as a smaller one. Anthony |
Watson A.Name \"Watt Sun - the Dark Remover\" wrote:
Anthony Matonak wrote: Fred B. McGalliard wrote: Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. [snip] The point is not whether or not they can be used, but whether or not they can be used economically and profitably. Oh, if that was the point then it's already been decided. Right now, solar PV is not economical or profitable except in niche applications not connected to the grid. Tomorrow... who knows? It does seem to be getting cheaper all the time. This, of course, has nothing to do with the question of "Is the profitable use of solar PV limited to big mega-corporations?" If we go back a couple of articles in this thread... KR Williams wrote: In article , box says... KR Williams wrote: My guess though, is that solar cells for the individual will never become cheaper than power from the grid, since the power company has access to the same technology and a *lot* better financing possibilities. ...and they don't have to have the pay- back in my lifetime. They have access to the tech, BUT, they also have to maintain the distribution system. ... All this is avoided cost on home solar. There is still a huge advantage of scale. Some technologies simply can not be affordably implemented on a small homeowner scale and for them to be used you need a big company or co-op. Solar PV is not in that category. The example of a solar powered radio shows this. It does not require huge resources to build, buy or maintain. The basic idea is that when it comes to solar PV installations there really isn't much advantage of scale. A huge installation will cost only slightly less per watt as a smaller one. Anthony |
"Clifford Heath" wrote in message ... Roger Gt wrote: The Indians would war on their Neighbors for anything they wanted. Kill anyone who resisted and sell prisoners into slavery. Thanks, I wondered where the USA learnt to do that. Made a fine art of it now, haven't they? I wish. If they are making a profit in war, why is our debt load increasing so fast? |
"Clifford Heath" wrote in message ... Roger Gt wrote: The Indians would war on their Neighbors for anything they wanted. Kill anyone who resisted and sell prisoners into slavery. Thanks, I wondered where the USA learnt to do that. Made a fine art of it now, haven't they? I wish. If they are making a profit in war, why is our debt load increasing so fast? |
|
|
On a sunny day (Tue, 20 Apr 2004 17:11:38 -0700) it happened Anthony Matonak
wrote in : Watson A.Name \"Watt Sun - the Dark Remover\" wrote: Anthony Matonak wrote: Fred B. McGalliard wrote: Sorry Anthony, but I think this is quite wrong. Solar PV requires a very large infrastructure to build, and a substantial infrastructure to maintain. I don't know about that. Solar PV can be used in any size from digital watches to powering hotels. [snip] The point is not whether or not they can be used, but whether or not they can be used economically and profitably. Oh, if that was the point then it's already been decided. Right now, solar PV is not economical or profitable except in niche applications not connected to the grid. Tomorrow... who knows? It does seem to be getting cheaper all the time. This, of course, has nothing to do with the question of "Is the profitable use of solar PV limited to big mega-corporations?" I like it that the Dutch solar car went cross Australia in 3 days or so with an average of over 100 km/h last year. Now here is a very sensible application in a suitable 'solar' climate. Those photocells were the same as used by the European Space Agency. I would love to have a few square meters of those to play with. JP |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com