Re: Solar-hydrogen home power system?

From: Ray Drouillard (cosmicpam2_at_comcast.net)
Date: 10/22/04 

Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:45:27 -0400

"Dan Bloomquist" <EXTRApublic21@lakeweb.com> wrote in message
news:417829E0.5080608@lakeweb.com...
>
>
> Ray Drouillard wrote:
> > "Dan Bloomquist" <EXTRApublic21@lakeweb.com> wrote in message
> > news:41771727.4060908@lakeweb.com...
> >>Ray Drouillard wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>>Effeciency is engineering, not economics.
> >>
> >>If you only get 5% of the heating value of coal to the wheels of a
> >
> > car,
> >
> >>what does that fuel cost? What infrastructure? It does all count. If
> >
> > it
> >
> >>were not about cost, we could cover a little spec of desert with
solar
> >>thermal and stop using coal for electricity.
> >
> >
> > Who said anything about using coal?
>
> If it is about hydrogen from electrolyses, it is about coal.

Not necessarily. It might be from nuclear energy. If we're discussing
a small scale application, it might be from something like photovoltaics
or even hydroelectric.

>
> >
> > Even so, assuming that your statement and figures are right (they
look
> > right), they don't indicate that engineering and economics are the
same
> > thing.
>
> I never said they were. Read what I wrote if you can get past the
> Outlook hack.
>
> >>
> >>I've been an advocate of methane powered SOFC, with a possible
bottom
> >>cycle for the heat, for years. But we would have to stop wasting
> >
> > methane
> >
> >>on peakers and get Canada to expand production.
> >
> >
> > Eat more beans :-)
> >
> > Seriously, though, if we run out of the methane that's in the ground
and
> > the stuff that's stuck in this methane ice stuff at the bottom of
the
> > ocean, we can make our own by digesting biomass. Even if no cheap
way
> > of digesting boimass on a large scale is developed, it is still
> > worthwhile to for some people (hobby farmers, homesteaders, people
with
> > kudzu or water hyassin infestations) to make methane on a small
scale
> > and use it to power their cars and homes.
>
> If we had some ham... Methane hydrates may never be an economical
> resource. And if it ever is, it may always be to dangerous.
>
> If we had some eggs... Bio from crops will not have an impact on
demand
> for energy.
>
> >
> > We need a methane fuel cell that we can buy for a reasonable price.
> > After a few years, people will be buying them from the junkyards and
> > using them at home.
>
> http://www.powergeneration.siemens.com/en/fuelcells
>
> Last I hear they were looking at $400/kw. Reasonable.
>
> >
> >>>Thirdly, it's a real fuel -- not something that is derived from a
> >>
> > fuel.
> >
> >>>It can be mined, or very easily created from biomass.
> >>
> >>There are no currently viable bio sources. Angiosperms and
> >
> > Gymnosperms
> >
> >>don't grow rapidly enough to be meaningful. Cultivated algae could
> >
> > work
> >
> >>in principle. But if it costs like solar...
> >
> >
> > Farmers currently dump manure into a big pond and let it rot there.
> > There is currently some work on digesting that stuff. It isn't
going to
> > solve the energy crisis, but it'll turn a liability into an asset
for
> > those people.
>
> It doesn't do anything meaningful for U.S. hydrocarbon demand.

It doesn't solve everyone's problem, but it helps solve two local
problems -- how to get rid of the poop, and how to save money on the
farm's energy needs.

>
> >>>
> >>>As far as comparing a hydrogen system to a battery system -- well,
I
> >>>expect the battery system to win when you consider efficiency. The
> >>>biggest obstacle for EV transportation is the lousy range of even
> >>
> > the
> >
> >>>best vehicle. It would be worth it to some people to give up some
> >>>efficiency just to get more range.
> >>
> >>I don't think 2 to 3 times the efficiency is just 'some'. So many of
> >
> > our
> >
> >>miles are just to get to work and back, short trips. Hell, if those
> >>commuter miles where done in civics and with car pooling, it would
> >
> > have
> >
> >>a dramatic effect on our consumption.
> >
> >
> > We are already living with vehicles that are a whole lot less
efficient
> > than an EV. We're doing that because EVs cost more (higher capital
> > costs), and EVs have a lousy range and take a long time to refuel.
>
> Are you sure it is not because folks that drive 3 ton SUVs in bumper
to
> bumper traffic aren't willing to give them up? Considering the price
of
> a civic, I wouldn't blame the economics.

The GM EV1 has a range of 50 or 60 miles, depending on how it's driven.
I wouldn't want to drive one because I would have to worry about running
out of juice and having no way to recharge.

The hybrid vehicles show some promise. They are currently more
expensive than regular vehicles, but the cost of fueling them is lower.
Unfortunately, fuel is not the biggest part of the cost of owning a
brand-new car. Very often, you are dealing with payments in the
$400.00 - $600.00 range (monthly). Added to that is insurance that can
cost $100.00 - $300.00 per month, depending on vehicle and driving
record. How much you spend on gasoline depends on the distance you
drive to work, your car's efficiency, and the amount of extra driving
you do.

It comes down to the question of whether you can make up the difference
in mileage between an expensive hybrid car and something cheaper like a
Ford Escort.

>
> >>
> >>If you are off the grid, you will likely do what most folks I know
off
> >>the grid do. Go on an electrical energy diet while on the batteries.
> >
> > Use
> >
> >>a generator for short periods of heavy load. Use PV to supplement
the
> >>charge on your batteries. And you go on that diet because
PV/batteries
> >>means your electricity runs around $.35-$.45/kwh if you figure a
> >
> > twenty
> >
> >>year lifetime on the equipment.
> >
> >
> > We are already on an energy diet. We replaced almost all of our
> > incandescant lights with compact fluorescents. Still, it's not as
> > extreme as if we had to deal with costly photovoltaics. Even with
the
> > low-cost photovoltaics or a methane fuel cell, I would be changing
the
> > entire lighting system of the house over to DC-powered fluorescents,
> > LEDs, or electroluminescent panels. The microwave would either be
> > replaced with a DC model, or I would get one of those inverter
> > microwaves and modify the innards a bit. I would modify the
computer
> > power supplies to run straight from the batteries. I would modify
all
> > of my power tools that already use a DC motor, and probably grit my
> > teeth and use a sine wave inverter for the ones that have induction
> > motors. I would have to replace the ballast in the mercury lights
(not
> > that I use them much). The furnace and pellet stove would probably
no
> > longer be necessary.
> >
> > But it wouldn't necessarily be for the money. We only spend eighty
> > bucks a month on electricity right now, so paying off a system that
> > costs more than a couple grand is going to take a few years.
>
> If you are using 25kwh/day, you have a surprise coming. You should
> crunch some numbers.

We're paying about eighty bucks a month. If we pay $5000.00 for a
system that gives us electricity absolutely free of charge, it will take
a little over five years for us to see a monitary benifit -- if we don't
finance it, if it never needs maintanance, and if we don't take
amoritization into account.

If we're talking about a fuel cell system, and we have to buy fuel,
it'll take longer.

>
> >>>Then, of course, there are things like inverters and/or DC
> >>
> > appliances.
> >
> >>>The ceiling fans would have to be ripped out and sold. I would
also
> >>>have to find something to replace the compact fluorescent lamps
that..
>
> I don't understand your aversion to an inverter. They are commonly
used
> by off gridders.
>
> >
> >>>So, my next realistic step is to make a digester to turn organic
> >>
> > garbage
> >
> >>>into methane. I don't expect to find an affordable methane fuel
> >>
> > cell
> >
> >>>any time soon, so if I get more methane than I can burn in my
> >>
> > appliances
> >
> >>>and vehicles, I'll use it to fuel a standard CNG generater, and use
> >>
> > the
> >
> >>>waste heat to heat the house. Lots of research has to be done
> >>
> > before
> >
> >>>getting anywhere near that far, though.
>
> As I missed it last time. You need to crunch numbers. Digesters are
used
> in the third world. It takes something on the order of 500 feet^3 just
> to run one cooking burner from what I've seen. An auto alone will
demand
> some 100 times that energy.

That's the kind of information I need. There is a frustrating gap in
the information that I have found. I haven't seen any data on the
volume needed or on techniques for increasing production. What I really
ought to do is go into the chicken/goat shelter, scoop up some of that
stuff, put it into a milk jug with some water, and see what happens.

> >>>to make that practical. On a large scale, off-shore nuclear energy
> >>>would make it a good option. On a small scale, it would take a
very
> >>>specific set of conditions to make it worthwhile.
> >>
> >>Even if you have to put in hundreds of miles of super conduction
> >>transmission, pumped storage would win hands down because of the
loss
> >>and capital expenditures of hydrogen.
> >
> >
> > If you're talking about large-scale production, and getting the
greenies
> > to stay off your back, you're talking about a nuke plant someplace
> > NIMBY -- maybe on some island somewhere. How do we then get the
power
> > to the people? Hydrogen is one way. Superconducting cables under
the
> > sea is another.
>
> This 'what if' is not reasonable.
>
> > If you're talking small-scale, then the conditions change a bit. To
> > make it worthwhile, you need a use for the hydrogen (like a car or
> > tractor), a cheap power source (geothermal, hydroelectric, magical
> > low-cost PV panels), and expensive alternatives.
>
> I'm posting from SEH so don't give a lot of attention to the 'good of
> the few'.

heh.

If enough people get off the grid some way or another, the load will be
reduced.

I can't prescribe policy for the suppliers of energy. The only thing I
can really do, in a practical sense, is to try to make my own power on a
small scale basis. I can speculate about the larger scale, but the only
good that does is to give me fodder for my fiction.

> > I have Mozilla, but I haven't set it up for usenet yet. The thing
likes
> > to shut itself down at the most inopportune times, so I haven't
totally
> > weaned myself off of OE yet.
>
> Version 7 or better? Mine runs all day without a problem.

Yah, I guess I ought to continue with the constant "Let's download a new
version and trade in our old bugs for some new bugs" dance.

Ray Drouillard

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Als Gourd: desafinado!
    ... Elvis Kabong wrote: ... Will never move a car, truck, or train. ... No tax break incentive yet, but I've cut down on energy consumption, ... That's the idea - use the electricity to split water ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Solar-hydrogen home power system?
    ... It might be from nuclear energy. ... >> Seriously, though, if we run out of the methane that's in the ground ... brand-new car. ... system that gives us electricity absolutely free of charge, ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Als Gourd: desafinado!
    ... Elvis Kabong wrote: ... Will never move a car, truck, or train. ... No tax break incentive yet, but I've cut down on energy consumption, ... That's the idea - use the electricity to split water ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Als Gourd: desafinado!
    ... Elvis Kabong wrote: ... Will never move a car, truck, or train. ... No tax break incentive yet, but I've cut down on energy consumption, ... That's the idea - use the electricity to split water ...
    (alt.guitar.amps)
  • Re: Solar-hydrogen home power system?
    ... >> Capital cost is economics, ... > thermal and stop using coal for electricity. ... they would be ideal for running an ev because the methane ... It still isn't as energy dense ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
Loading