dohboi wrote:r wrote: " most people worldwide earn less than $10 a day, with many earning only around $3 daily. They cannot afford or can barely access what the middle class takes for granted."
Not sure what your point is here.
In most rural locations around the world in poor areas, solar and/or wind is cheaper than getting wires strung across great distances to connect to any (usually very intermittent) grid electricity. So your monetary argument is actually in favor of distributed alternatives in these cases.
And yes, shipping is needed in most cases, but ships are starting to have sails again, and this will likely increase. Trains can be electrified pretty easily, too.
Published on Nov 9, 2013
Bill Mollison explains what a trompe is and how compressed air can provide limitless amounts of clean energy using technology we have had for hundreds of years.
careinke wrote:We seem to be limiting ourselves to solar and wind vs fossil fuels. What about compressed air produced with Trompes? Once built, it operates with no moving parts, and you can basically run all machinery, transportation, refrigeration, and electrical production using compressed air. Imagine a freezer with no moving parts and using no electricity.
The technology is hundreds of years old and played a huge role in Chicago and Paris at one time. It has also been used in mining operations to pump fresh cool air into mines, run drills, jackhammers, and even turn a generator for lights in the mine shaft.
Here is a video of Bill Mollison giving a class on Trompes where he claims limitless clean versatile energy at a "Bugger All" price. He is a very entertaining teacher. But let me warn you, when you watch it, Mollison will say some things that will strain your credibility meter. If however you research his statements, you will find them all to be true. This is a really annoying trait of his.Published on Nov 9, 2013
Bill Mollison explains what a trompe is and how compressed air can provide limitless amounts of clean energy using technology we have had for hundreds of years.
https://youtu.be/-9NqqDL6bkk
Hugh Finlay, the generation director at ScottishPower, said: "Coal has long been the dominant force in Scotland's electricity generation fleet but the closure of Longannet signals the end of an era.
"For the first time in more than a century no power produced in Scotland will come from burning coal.
toolpush wrote:Tanada,
From the image attached, there does not appear to be too many obstacles for the turbines, and they appear much higher than I have normally seen on home size wind turbines in rural environment, you can't just write of the results because it does not fit your agenda.
These findings, just point out that, going off grid with wind and solar, doesn't frees you of the guilt of using fossil fuels. Basically, small wind and solar, up to not long ago, was an investment in fossils fuels,to make the tools, to produce electricity where you liked, outside of a grid connection.
We can't just forget about, that FF investment, just because we are producing electricity from renewables, especially when that payback in energy may take a very long time, if ever.
Real-world tests of small wind turbines in Netherlands and the UK
Two real-world tests performed in the Netherlands and in the UK confirm our earlier analysis that small wind turbines are a fundamentally flawed technology. Their financial payback time is much longer than their life expectancy, and in urban areas, some poorly placed wind turbines will not even deliver as much energy as needed to operate them (let alone energy needed to produce them). Given their long payback period relative to their life expectancy, most small wind turbines are net energy consumers rather than net energy producers.
The machines face two fundamental problems: there is not enough wind at low altitudes in a built-up environment, and the energy production of a wind turbine declines more than proportionately to the rotor diameter. Wind power rules, but small wind turbines are a swindle.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
vtsnowedin wrote:Lets do a little cost analysis.
Take that 31 ft- 20KW wind generator I linked to above.
Installed cost is $110,000 without subsidies. Lets estimate a useful life of ten years with zero salvage value and that that $110K covers all energy and commodity costs to build and deliver it. Net cost $11,000/ year.
Estimating the site will turn the generator just 25 percent of the time would yield 43,800KWH/ year out put. 11,000/43800 = $0.251/ KWH which is not bad considering that I'm paying $0.21/KWH retail for electricity now.
Now consider that the cost of electricity will surly go up at least at the rate of inflation and that the mill may well last twenty years and not just ten.
So not a slam dunk but not necessarily a bad investment either. It all comes down to future inflation in energy costs and the durability of the unit.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:vtsnowedin wrote:Lets do a little cost analysis.
Take that 31 ft- 20KW wind generator I linked to above.
Installed cost is $110,000 without subsidies. Lets estimate a useful life of ten years with zero salvage value and that that $110K covers all energy and commodity costs to build and deliver it. Net cost $11,000/ year.
Estimating the site will turn the generator just 25 percent of the time would yield 43,800KWH/ year out put. 11,000/43800 = $0.251/ KWH which is not bad considering that I'm paying $0.21/KWH retail for electricity now.
Now consider that the cost of electricity will surly go up at least at the rate of inflation and that the mill may well last twenty years and not just ten.
So not a slam dunk but not necessarily a bad investment either. It all comes down to future inflation in energy costs and the durability of the unit.
You don't mention anything about maintenance or operational costs at all. Are such systems purely "set it and forget it for the long term"? If so, that seems rather unusual in the world of man-made things with moving parts that operate outside. If not, those costs (including all labor for things like inspections, etc) need to be accounted for.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just wondering how accurate such an analysis is. Like for example, the 25% wind blowing enough to operate the generator estimate might vary RADICALLY depending on where the site is, which would of course radically change the numbers.
dohboi wrote:Looks like a beautiful spot!
Excellent sunrises. Have to go west to my camp ridge to watch the sunset. An even better windmill site.dohboi wrote:But do you get good sunrise or sunset views?
Does the high wind make it hard to grow things up there?
Return to Environment, Weather & Climate
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests