Slashdot Mirror

Ethanol is proven as a fuel. Brazil has proven ethanol made from sugarcane is feasible. Switchgrass however is a better raw material than sugarcane.

Windmills turned out to be bird-blenders are useless with still air.

Older technology windmills, with their faster blades, are a danger to birds however today's slower spinning wind gennies are safer.

The problem is that solar, wind, and biofuels are actually not half bad for "peak" load, but most folks can't tell the difference between base and peak load.

Many people are able to live comfortably Off the Grid with solar and/or wind gennies. "Homepower and Solar Today show how people do it.

Would you say that algae farms that photosynthesize sunlight and produce hydrogen to burn to get energy is a more efficient energy path that soaking up the sunlight's energy directly with solar panels? I think not.

Ce depend, it depends. Though they are improving in efficiency solar PVs, photovoltaic, panels aren't really efficient. The best ones I've heard of are only about 22% efficient. They are good at the point of use, but if the place the energy derived is not local then an energy carrier such as hydrogen may be better than putting up transmission lines. And in some cases it is impractical forget inefficient to build landline carriers. For those who build homes away from any powerlines it's cheaper to use locally produced energy such as PV, wind generators, or hybrid systems than it is have powerlines strung out. Which is why more and more people are going Off The Grid. It cases like this PV or wind gennies make perfect sense.

Simply, you use the most appropiate tech for a given situation. Sometimes hydrogen is more appropriate and in other in other case it's pv that appropriate or another energy source is better.

Energy effeciency is a far better, cheaper, and more effective route than building nuke plants.

Despite what Cheney says efficiency is all three of these, better, cheaper, and more effective than bulding not just nuclear power plants but any power plant. I want to build a home Off the Grid and build a hybrid energy system of solar PVs and wind gennies, generators. First step though is building it as energy efficient as possible. Home Power is a good magazine with articles showing just how this can be done. Solar Today also has good articles on designing buildings and energy systems.

Would be a combination of renewables, and algae biomass driven "Air Blown Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle" power plants.

Better probably is using algae to produce hydrogen.

Your best bet if you don't like this is to go off the grid. But we know what an exercise in futility that is unless you're willing to live in Montana ala Ted Kazinsky.

Actually more and more people are living off the grid, and it's getting easier and easier to build a home to live off the grid. Most of those doing so don't live in Montana either. Many live on either coast, CA to WA in the west and FL to ME in the east. A person can build a comfortable home off the grid in most places in the US, most parts of the US are either good for solar power or for wind power. For some it makes more sense to build an energy efficient home with solar or wind power than it is to have powerlines put in. And because those who put in these systems either won't have a power bill or will have one that is significantly reduced in cost, morgage lenders are offering higher morgages to those who do this than those that don't.

It's very difficult to make yourself completely energy independent.

It's not difficult to make a home you build energy independent. Using passive solar designs an architect can design a home that requires little energy to heat and cool. More negawatts of power can be "generated" by using energy efficient appliances and lighting. Fact is is that more and more people are building off the grid. And lenders, morgage companies, are helping. Because an energy efficient home that produces the energy it uses has one bill less to pay, the electric bill, lenders offer larger loans whch can be used to pay for the equipment used or for other things.

Oh, and the government will agree to only hold the wind power industry responsable for the first 10 billion dollars or so of damages

I know of no government guarranty to wind power such as this, can you provide a link?

You don't store electricity if you don't have to, because the storage systems are expensive.

Many people have battery banks to store the energy their solar, wind, or hybrid systems generate. Magazines like Home Power show just how people are doing it. Fact is is more and more people are going Off the Grid. And because they are off the grid they have to store energy in battery banks. It may seem expensive to setup such a system but the payback period can be as little as a few years, and that doesn't take in inflation, the cost of electricity going up. Once the system's cost has been recovered what's left is "free energy". Even the costs of maintance is less than the cost of electricity used if bought from the power company.

Therefore you need backup power capability, which substantially increases the costs of the 'green' power, because you essentially have to build double the capacity. Oh, and most standbys are either expensive NG or dirty coal.

This is basically true only on the grid, but off the grid is another matter.

Again, wind power should be viable, out in the countryside. But not here, in town. It's just not realistic, even though it's windy here. Of course, if you're off-grid in the countryside, then you need to deal with batteries...

Ok, I didn't pick up earlier that you were in the city. That changes a lot, especially as how cities have all those building regulations. In cases like this wind gennies don't make sense. They do in some rural settings though. I live in Minneasota and along with the Dakotas it produces megawatts of electricity. Wind genies also can help farmers, for every wind genie they're paid. As for living off the grid, for many who build homes where there isn't any powerlines near installing thier own system is the most financially viable exercise economically. It can cost 10,000s of thousands of dollars to have powerlines put in. For more than 20 years that's what I've wanted to do, build my home in the wildness.

As for a wind genie

I wasn't speaking of specific models, "wind genie" is short for "wind generator". I picked it up in "Home Power" if I recall right, another renewable or selfsefficient magazine if wrong.

What few people realize is how much the price of electricity varies. So go get your utility bill. Call the nearest solar energy installation guys. You may find that it's profitable RIGHT NOW to put solar cells on your roof!

Depending on circumstances you can have a payback period as short as 7 years for a solar power system. For a few it's even sooner, especially those who build off the grid.

Secondly, it was the free market that made that gouging possible. By having a free market on KwH pricing and opening up all aspects to competition and thus making the little intentional blackout scheme profitable.

From what I recall of CA's "deregulation", which was really moving regulations around, price caps were placed on power generators but not on the sale of the power, and the two were decoupled, ie generators could not be sellers and visa versa. At the same tyme as those rolling blackouts years ago there was a wind farm that was able to produce several megawatts of power that sat there ideal because there weren't any power transmission lines installed so the power could be transmitted. Now if the Govanator has his way with the million solar roofs the state will be more independent for electricity. His hydrogen initiative is also a good idea.

Firstly the cost of getting into competition is extreme. Nuclear power plants don't grow on trees and neither do millions of miles of electrical lines.

True but PVs can be "made to grow" on roofs. And as many people who are Off the grid can tell you people can and do make what electricity they use, and without those miles of electrical lines. Actually that's why some go off the grid, they build a home where there aren't any power lines and it can be cheaper to generate your own electricity than it would cost to have power lines installed.

Secondly, it was the free market that made that gouging possible. By having a free market on KwH pricing and opening up all aspects to competition and thus making the little intentional blackout scheme profitable.

No it wasn't any free market that made gouging possible it was government granted monopolies that made gouging possible. A free market would of allowed anyone and everyone with the wherewithall, ability, to come in and create their own infrastructure. Why oh why do people mix up a freemarket with government granted monopolies?

Solar - impractical in many areas due to lack of intense sunlight, and photovoltaics are very expensive. In the long run, photovoltaics on every home's roof may be a good thing, but only when the price gets more sensible. Also, here in the UK there is some effort involved since you need to get planning permission to put photovoltaics on your roof (why?!?). Of course there are lots of nasty chemicals involved in the production of semiconductors so maybe the energy savings don't offset the damage caused by the production of the panels in the first place?

PV panels are dropping in price and as more are sold more factories will be built thus reducing the price even more. It's the upfront cost that are relatively high but once paid for they'll provide energy "for free". There are maintenance costs but those are lower than having to continually pay for power from the grid. The payback period for good systems are down to about 7 years, ie in 7 years the cost of the system will be paid for from having to pay for energy from the grid. And at least here in the US it's cheaper to have a pv system in some new home construction than it to have power lines lain to the residence. More and more people are going off the grid. Now the chemicals used, the manufacture of, and energy input for pvs bother me. I haven't seen any life cycle analysis of this. I wonder if the energy used to make pvs is less than or more than the energy they will create in their lifetime. Probably less but I haven't seen this. Maybe the used chemicals can either be recycled or seperated and broken down into useful chemicals for other processes. I've thought of trying this in another area, photography. Film contains silver which winds up in the chemicals when the film is developed. So I was wondering whether is would be feasable to process used developer to extract the silver as well as the other impurities from development.

Wind - suffers from the "not in my back yard" problem - noone wants wind turbines anywhere near them, not to mention the fact that they kill birds

Some don't mind at all, I'm one of them. I'd like to build my own home off the grid and use a hybrid energy system, pvs and wind gennies, for electricity. It's the old wind gennies that were responsible for the reputation of killing birds. They had shorter blades and spun fast and thus were a hazzard to birds but newer designs have the blades longer and they don't spin nearly as fast. As you mention the UK here's a UK website, Yes2Wind. On the front page this month they have this to say:

"Myth: Wind turbines disturb migratory bird patterns."

"Before a wind farm is given planning permission, a strict Environmental Impact Assessment must be undertaken and investigations into any possible disruption of local environment or wildlife. If the proposed site turns out to be on a path along which migrating birds frequently fly, the site will be adjusted to eliminate adverse impacts on the bird's migrations and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds insists that the effects of any approved developments are monitored before and after construction. Available evidence suggests that appropriately positioned wind farms do not pose a significant hazard for birds. Migrating birds also usually fly at heights of 150m above the ocean or land, which is higher than most wind turbines."

In their faqs section they have this:

"Don't they kill lots of birds?"

"Monitoring of existing wind farms suggests that with sensitive siting there is no adverse effect on bird populations. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) supports the sustainable development of renewable energy such as wind power because it helps mitigate climate change, which they believe 'poses the most significant long-term threat to the environment...The available evidence suggests that appropriately positioned wind f

This will need quite a few nuclear reactors, solar panels + most of us will go to work by bicycle.

More nuclear power plants aren't really needed, as it is now there are techniques that will reduce the use of fossil fuels. A simple change in light bulbs reduces the electricity used in building. All of my bulbs are cfls, compact florence lights, that use 1/4 the power and provides the same amount of light as a regular incandescent light, of course the light from them has a different effect on film than incandescent lights. New appliances are also more energy efficient and can be made even more so. For instance look at refrigerators and freezers. On most the compressor and motor is in the back on the bottom. However both compressors and motors create heat and heat rises, so when they operate the heat goes through what is being cooled thus requiring more energy to be used. Some companies, like Sunfrost manufacture refrigerators and freezers with the compressor and motors on top, so they are more energy efficient. More energy efficient tips can be picked up through magazines like Solar Today , Home Power , and Natural Home and Garden as well as several others. Those who live off the grid by generating the power they use use these techniques as well as others. Many other things can be done commercially and industrially to reduce power needs as well. Natural Capitalism documents case studies of how different businesses have reduced their energy as well as raw material needs.