Re: Art, where's the buzz on nanotech saving America today?

Straydog wrote:


<snip>

Everyone knows this. The point is that solar power is now, in low unit quantities, a $7 per watt source of renewable energy.


Compared with about $1/W for a liquid-fuelled IC engine generator.


Which will cost $X/W, _additional_, in costs for fuel, maintenance, and _permanent_ loss in non-renewable resources.

True, but the operating expenses are minimal with PV but with an IC generator, one doesn't have to go outside and either brush off snow or hose it down to wash off dust.

<snip>

Back then, PV and WTGs weren't economically competitive with conventional energy sources, plus many people had a "What, me worry?" attitude, along with lots of NIMBY.


This is where tax credits, deductions, subsidies and other breaks can/do come into the picture.

Until the environmentalists get into the picture. Some of the arguments against placing WTGs offshore are completely absurd, including "spoiling" one's view.

What bothers me the most are the simple
"economist" arguments based on the inability of economics to place a dollar value on what-do-you-do-when-the-non-renewable-resources-are-gone situation. When that petroleum is gone, its gone. When we have so much radioactive waste from nukes that the earth glows at night and we've all become mutant cockroaches, will life be worth anything?

That's one reason why I find the arguments that nuclear power is "green" completely laughable. A buddy of mine who used to work in that business figures that the industry's on its last legs and this is a final attempt to stay alive.

<snip>

I made rough calculations and found that about 1/2 of the area that is needed is already on 1-story house roofs.


But, as I mentioned earlier, they won't be as effective as those modules that have variable tilt angles and, possibly, trackers.


Most of the stuff I've seen in photos don't track, but its a start.

On the other hand, there is still considerable light available in the evenings due to diffuse radiation as well as light that's reflected off surrounding buildings or landscape. Estimating that, however, can be tricky.


This assumes that the

modules are located in flat open areas. Locating them in surroundings where there are reflective surfaces or, for that matter, anything which shades them changes their performance.


My brother's setup was also fixed and he knew he was not getting 100% out of the installation. So, he was still happy with what he got (and his deep cycle golf cart batteries, inverter, etc.).

A fixed installation is cheaper because no tracker's required. If the modules are installed at a reasonable angle, they can produce decent amounts of power.

<snip>

There are several ways one can accomplish this. One is to reduce overall load demand at a given time, which, depending on what essential appliances one has (such as a fridge or stove), might not be that easy. Another is to shift the use of such appliances or, for that matter, peak load demand to a more convenient time of day. That's something I plan on investigating.


Certainly one can make up deficiencies with load management. It does not take a PhD to come up with practical solutions.

Actually, what I'm interested in is the optimization of these sorts of systems and examining how factors such as component prices affect the configuration one obtains. Also, the location of the installation (or, rather, the availability of wind and sunlight at the site) can make an enormous difference in what one has. I looked at several locations in western Canada and got some interesting results.

<snip>

Or fed back into the grid and make money for the owner.


Subject to applicable regulations.


All depends on what the situation is in your area.

There are people, however, who attach

their PV systems to the grid without permission.


For at least the areas I've been aware of where the laws apply, they can't refuse.

Again, the key word is *applicable*.


Doing that is very foolish

as their connections are often of poor quality and would never pass inspection even if they were legitimate.


That's not MY problem.

It would be if someone's system malfunctions and brings down the grid in your area.

<snip>

I know of someone who set up his house to run on PV and sell the excess back into the grid. Getting permission, not just from civil authorities but his neighbours as well, took him several years.


That, too, is not MY problem.

Again, he had to conform to the local regulations and bylaws in order to become a recognized power producer.



whatever's left is often dissipated.



Better put on the thinking cap and do something with it. At least I would.


Optimizing the surplus or deficit is critical. That was one of the things I investigated for my thesis and which I'm working on right now.


Anyone who looks into this just needs to do his homework. The technology, as far as I'm concerned, is NOT rocket science.


Actually, it's not as simple as that, nor is the solution straightforward, depending on how one models the system. Some of the equations I used to describe the system I was looking at were non-linear, which makes it a more difficult problem to solve. There are several parameters which can be varied and it's not immediately known how changing one, and by how much, affects the solution.
.