Re: Home Wind Power
- From: william.mook@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:44:31 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 19, 7:26 pm, Charlie E. <edmond...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:22:45 -0800 (PST), william.m...@xxxxxxxxx
wrote:
The cost of the wind turbine isn't too bad... about $4 per watt. The
total energy available may be estimated by the following map;
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/ilands/fig13.html
Some have even published a wind roadmap
http://www.awea.org/smallwind/documents/31958.pdf
and written songs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obfci1CIqq8&NR=1
I am just a dreamer, but is this just a dream?
Well, the capital utilization is still the killer. Even in areas
where wind is a good bet, you need two or three watts for every
AVERAGE watt, since the windmill stands idle, or is underpowered 50%
to 75% of the time. In areas with less wind, you have even lower
capital utilization.
The average power needs of a home is around 1 kW. It can peak at 5
kW - when compressor kick on and everyone is home using appliances.
It can fall to far less than 1 kW when everyone is asleep, or folks
are away at work and school.
So, as in the case of any intermittent generation, you need an
intertie. This runs an added $1 per watt - and with battery backup -
even more.
Wind is $4 and batteries are another $2 with intertie. That's $6 per
watt - and you need 2 or 3 or 4 times the amount you need on average.
So, let's say you have a 5kW system and are paying $6 per watt-
That's $30,000 - for a home based system. The batteries last about 4
years, and they're $10,000 - so that's $3,300 per year right there.
The windmill lasts 40 years or so - but does require maintenance - so,
you're paying $400 per month - and payments on the balance of system
is another $200 per month - a total of $600 per month - to get all
your energy out of wind - if you live in an area that has good wind.
1 kW x 730.5 hours per month = 730.5 kWh per month.
The $600 per month cost is $0.82 per kWh - this is 10x higher than the
cost of energy for a typical home - which pays $60 per month for
electricity on average.
In Ohio you have 1,310 hours of sunlight per year. So, a 6.7 kW
system can deliver 1.0 kW continuously in ohio. The costs here are
the same - $6 per peak watt - when intertie and battery backup is
included. $40,000 for the system, but since maintenance on the solar
panels is lower than on windmills, costs are about the same $600 per
month all in.
Now compare this to my system that produces and burns hydrogen. First
off the solar panels drive electrolysis units that are 68% efficient,
and then the hydrogen and oxygen are burned in a small internal
combustion engine which is air independent and captures the water
vapor. This small engine 8 hp engine costs $90 - in quantity and
generates up to 5 kW AC - on demand by burning hydrogen - in response
to demand. The electrical portion costs $250. The engine is 30%
efficient, so to generate 1 kW on average, requires 3.3 kW of
electrolyzer output - which means 4.9 kW of AVERAGE photovoltaic
panels - which means a peak output of 32.5 kW.
At 380 W/m2 - 38 kW of panels is 100 sq m - 10 meters x 10 meters. 2
kg is produced each day from 18 liters of water. 1,800 liters are
stored in the closed system. 10 cubic meters store 200 kg of hydrogen
gas - 5 cubic meters store 1,600 kg of oxygen gas - at high pressure
- providing a 100 day backup. At $0.07 per peak watt - $2,660 for
the solar hydrogen system just described. A total of $3,000 - which
has a 12 year lifespan - and a modest maintenance requirement. A
total of $3,600 over the life of the system. This is $300 per year -
and less than $30 per month with interest - which cuts electricity
costs in half.
Hi Bill,
So, if I have a 33 foot square of available space in my backyard, or
that big of uninteruped roof area, I could use solar hydrogen to power
my home. Not that many homes have the necessary space, especially in
cities.
Charlie
Rooftop panels is a secondary market. So, that's right.
Yet, two property owners, anglo ashanti gold and newmont mining
together own over 300,000 sq km. That's 115,736 sq miles. Most of
these lands are sunny lands. Since that is where low rank gold ore is
that they mine. These two companies also have money set aside to
reclaim that land when they're done with the land. So, there is a
business deal to do here. The companies also have rights of way for
rail lines, roadways and so forth, to and from the sites - which
easily supports the introduction of water and hydrogen pipelines.
My system produces 30 metric tons per day per square kilometer from
these sites. This is 9 million metric tons per day made from 81
million kiloliters per day of DI water.
In a year that's 3.3 billion metric tons of hydrogen - enough hydrogen
that when burned instead of coal oil and natural gas, provides for ALL
of our energy needs.
So, this is preferred to putting panels on roofs.
Yet, there is an optimal order of battle.
Here it is;
1) buy idled coal fired power plants and replace the coal burner with
a hydrogen burner, supply hydrogen to the plant by pipeline, and sell
electricity at competitive rates to the present owner - free of
carbon;
There are 1,036 coal fired plants in the USA. Over 150 of them are
idled. Another 150 are on the chopping block. More may follow
quickly. ALL of them burn 1.1 billion tons of coal each year. ALL
may be supplied with 184 million tons of hydrogen - and ELIMINATE coal
use at these plants. This requires that 10,960 sq km of solar panels
be installed in Northern Nevada at Anglo and Newmont sites - that
Union Pacific rights of way be used to pipe in desalinated water from
the Pacific and the Great Salt Lake. Then, hydrogen gas sent by
pipelines throughout the USA along Union Pacific and other rights of
ways - to all the 1,036 coal fired plants - to provide them with
hydrogen.
2) Once the hydrogen burner supplies the plant with steam, take the
coal burner section and add in a bergius reactor to convert the
stranded coal into liquid fuels - gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel by
adding a little more hydrogen to it. The tars and clays are turned
into asphalt and also sold. No carbon emissions or other emissions
are produced by this process.
The 1.1 billion tons of stranded coal is converted to 7.5 billion
barrels of gasoline diesel fuel and jet fuel by adding 94 million tons
of hydrogen made on 5,480 sq km of sunny lands in Northern Nevada.
The US currently imports 5.5 billion barrels of oil per year, and
produces 1.3 billion barrels domestically. With 7.5 billion barrels
made from coal in this way, the US would have the capacity to EXPORT
2.0 billion barrels of oil products each year into the world market -
reversing its balance of trade to the black - and gaining control of
pricing of this valuable commodity all while cutting its carbon
footprint by more than half, and establishing a national hydrogen
infrastructure.
3) With revenues from the sale of 53% of the nation's electricity and
all the nation's oil products, plus 2 billion barrels of exported oil
products, build additional solar panels on old surface mines and sell
hydrogen for direct use as;
a) chemical feedstock; e.g. ammonia production;
b) reducing agent; e.g. aluminum production, silicon production,
etc.;
c) biomass reduction to synfuels;
d) additional coal reduction to synfuels;
e) reduction of carbon dioxide to methane;
f) direct sale of hydrogen as replacement for;
i) coal
ii) oil
iii) natural gas
At this point hydrogen is positioned to take over from fossil fuels as
fossil fuel outputs fall.
.
- References:
- Re: Home Wind Power
- From: Charlie E .
- Re: Home Wind Power
- Prev by Date: Re: Low cost hydrogen today
- Next by Date: Re: Tough time to sell Global Warming theory....
- Previous by thread: Re: Home Wind Power
- Next by thread: Re: Home Wind Power
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
