Free State Wyoming Forum
Prospective Free State Wyoming (FSW) Members and Interested Parties => Prospective Free State Wyoming (FSW) Members and Interested Parties => Topic started by: shattenjagger on July 05, 2011, 05:57:19 PM
-
Hello all, prospective FSW member checking in from MN. I grew up in ND and enjoyed the life style and politics of the area, unfortunately the job market i chose (wind energy, don't judge, i just enjoy power/substation engineering) took me all across the country in 6 month stints, finally accepting a promotion and settlng in MN very recently. As I started paying attention to the local politics, i quickly realized that this place offends me and while the rural areas are okay, they are quickly sliding the wrong direction. In short, i am on the verge of settling here, buying a house, and attempting to start a family and i am having second thoughts.
Now on to the meat and potatoes, I have a pretty good background in the wind industry, spending the last five years working for the largest wind turbine construction company in the states. I stared as a field engineer, but worked my way up to electrical superintendent within a year and subsequently ending up now in a position as an engineering and operation manager. I enjoy the work and would be most qualified to continue in the same vein, but the whole subsidized industry continues to rub me the wrong way. What is the climate for that type of work, both within the FSW and in the Wyoming economy?
There are quite a few paths I could take (master electrician in mn and taking my mn professional engineer test in october, which could transfer after a year by reciprocity), but I do enjoy the work and switching fields would undoubtably mean a cut in pay, i suppose conversely it would also mean freedom from an industry that is heavily dependant on the whims of the government.
Either way, glad to finally make my first post and hear from you folks.
int ro to fsw int ro to fsw Saved seconds ago Saved seconds ago Refresh
-
Welcome!
MN is (as RICH would say) known as "Minne-socialist" :D
I would consider that you move to WY and use your knowledge and talents by becoming a windmill generator (small style for home / farm use) salesperson or even opening your own business as an independent distributor/installer.
In any case, welcome to the forum.
FDNYLiberty
-
Hello, Shat. I am new, too, and just wanted to check out the latest posts. By the sound of it and the aim of the group, your line of work would be perfect (if I am understanding correctly). Just as the previous poster put, specializing it for private use, especially for regular individuals, would be great and it would really cut down on government reliance. Even if it is expensive, payments could be made based on the amount of money saved each month using the new energy system. (My father and I discussed this once, only we were focused on solar energy.)
By the way, how does wind energy compare? It is difficult to find information on it that does not seem biased for or against it.
-
Wind energy is a far cry better than solar in terms of economic return, especially in a place like wyoming where it blows a lot and often. Unfortunately, you are still talking about a minimum of ten years till payoff, and that is with some battery storage of some sort. For people who wish to get off the grid it is an exciting alternative, but hard work, innovation in implementation, and a decent chunk of starting capital is required.
The commercial side is quite a bit more lucrative, but the starting capital is even higher, plus the added stress of securing purchase agreements with the local utility.
I have been mainly looking on the comercial side for work, but I will do some more research into the small wind market in wyoming and see what the possibilities look like. Additionally, it is always interesting to see how local regulations and zoning have influenced wind devolopment and how the local utilities have handled interconnection.
Thanks for pointing me in a new direction Dani and FDNYliberty
ps Minnie-socialist is pretty right on :)
-
That new molten salt battery technology has the potential to make wind far more viable, by allowing greater time-shifting of use vs generation. Maybe even make it more viable for home/DIY use served by local entrepreneurs.
-
You are correct, but much of that technology is pretty bleeding edge for the time being. And while there are some new models that are running at cooler temperatures, the last stats I remember seeng when we bid a solar project last year was somewhere around 300deg C. Something to consider when installing in a home. Pretty decent efficency in terms of thermal storage, only around 1% loss, but they lose more than that if you consider converting from electric energy, to thermal, then back to electric.
We are currently using some on a concentrated solar project, it would be interesting to see some data when they finish (unfortunately not for a couple years, i think).
Junkyard storage techniques are somewhat popular, go find some old farm equipment that still has batteries and use those, or perhaps a pumped water storage (a la gravity battery), if you have the land with a couple diferent elevation ponds.
-
Shat,
The molten salt stuff I saw was electrolytic storage, not thermal. The molten part was to keep it fluid and ionized... or something like that. I read that MIT, who developed it, expects commercial application as soon as next year. We might be talking about two different things, I'm not sure, but you're probably more in touch with it than I am.
I've always thought I want to just build a giant multi-ton flywheel on magnetic bearings and use that for energy storage. ;)
-
Here's my humble opinion.
Most of these "alternative energy" systems are simply scams. Boondoggles. etc.
ALL are manufactured and used ONLY because of government "rebates", "credits", and "incentives".
None would exist without the taxpayer supporting it.
(OK, perhaps some veerrry small percentage where someone lives 50 miles from the nearest line.)
If you took away the taxpayer's contribution all of these companies (manufacturers and installers) would dry up and float away.
Sadly, none of them can compete with the cost to the customer for "conventional fuels" such as coal, gas, or nuclear.
There is nothing cheaper than Wyoming coal for producing energy, 24/7, day or night, calm or windy. No storage required. The sun's energy is already stored in the fuel from millions of years ago. And using the technology available today with scrubbers and such, the pollution becomes less and less every year.
But as Obama said:
"Under MY plan, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket."
He's talking about alternative energy here, and Tax and Trade of course.
Here's my bottom line: If someone designs a wind or solar system without government handouts, if someone then builds that system without government handouts, if someone installs and maintains that system without government handouts, and if someone can produce energy, 24/7 with that system at a competitive rate, then GREAT! Go for it! I'm on board!
Until then, it's a scam. Like ethanol.
Mac
BTW, the retail rate for residential electricity here in Crook County with Powder River Energy is $0.055/KW-Hr. They don't produce the energy, they just distribute it. Much of our energy comes out of Gillette from the Dry Creek and Wyodak plants. In fact, they're having the grand opening of the new Dry Creek coal fired power plant on August 11, just north of Gillette.
-
I'm interested in at-home alternatives from a resiliency POV, not because I give the slightest darn about "conserving the nation's energy resources" or any BS like that. Resiliency considerations are threefold, keeping in mind that all public utilities are state subsidized, price controlled, and enforced monopolies/oligopolies just as much as alternative is, though the balance is fluid.
First, the normal causes of disruption, storms, downed lines, natural disaster, etc.
Second: regulatory risk, which includes everything from price spikes and shortages and planned brownouts to getting my door kicked in in the middle of the night because my bitcoin mining rig used too many kilowatts and they thought I was growing pot (has already happened to at least one person). Not to mention things like "smart thermostats" controlled by the power company, and other such throttling/rationing schemes.
Third, the usual TSHTF risks.
I'm willing to pay a somewhat higher cost to mitigate some of those risks.
I have no intention of giving up the grid until there's no choice, but I wouldn't mind having backup, and maybe a way to defer costs if that becomes feasible (it's not now except on long timeframes with substantial up front investment, and even that is marginal). Plus, I'm just fascinated by the science of it, it could be a fun hobby.
Yes, ethanol is probably the single most fallacious and disastrously dangerous of all the energy scams out there.
-
Coal. Mans best friend. $35 per ton. You can even get buckwheat size for free in many places as long as you haul it away. It works well in pellet stoves.
-
Coal. Mans best friend. $35 per ton. You can even get buckwheat size for free in many places as long as you haul it away. It works well in pellet stoves.
Yes, I agree CrappieWy. But only "if" you can "haul it away." While obviously abundant in WY, during an emergency or other SHTF situation, you may not have any gasoline available for your truck to go and get it miles away.
What we seem to be discussing and suggesting here is homestaed "backup" energy sources (solar/ wind / other) for emergency or grid down situations. I believe that there is a market for either this persons knowledge and/ or experience to guide or advise any interested parties on the types and use of available systems found available on the market for non-commercial (which is regulated) use. To hell with the gooberment "credits and rebates", I for one don't really give a hoot about that. But what I do care about, in this case, is being able to talk to someone who can best advise me on how to do what I want to do as far as a home alternative energy system. I beleive that this individual can offer such advise, and hope he makes full use of this knowledge and talent.
FDNYLiberty
-
Correction to my previous post. The statement "(which is regulated)" sholud be "(which may be non-regulated)"
-
Coal. Mans best friend. $35 per ton. You can even get buckwheat size for free in many places as long as you haul it away. It works well in pellet stoves.
Yes, I agree CrappieWy. But only "if" you can "haul it away." While obviously abundant in WY, during an emergency or other SHTF situation, you may not have any gasoline available for your truck to go and get it miles away.
What we seem to be discussing and suggesting here is homestaed "backup" energy sources (solar/ wind / other) for emergency or grid down situations. I believe that there is a market for either this persons knowledge and/ or experience to guide or advise any interested parties on the types and use of available systems found available on the market for non-commercial (which is regulated) use. To hell with the gooberment "credits and rebates", I for one don't really give a hoot about that. But what I do care about, in this case, is being able to talk to someone who can best advise me on how to do what I want to do as far as a home alternative energy system. I beleive that this individual can offer such advise, and hope he makes full use of this knowledge and talent.
FDNYLiberty
Run your truck on coal too.:D
-
And it makes a great Christmas gift for that politician in your life.
-
Here's my bottom line: If someone designs a wind or solar system without government handouts, if someone then builds that system without government handouts, if someone installs and maintains that system without government handouts, and if someone can produce energy, 24/7 with that system at a competitive rate, then GREAT! Go for it! I'm on board!
Actually, the folks over at Home Power Magazine have been doing that for years, and they also hate the rebates and credits because the last time that happened (Carter regime?), it drew in a lot of scammers and made a black eye for the industry.
It's price competitive as long as you are far enough out in the boonies; miles of power poles tend to get expensive. There are other advantages like not being dependent on a centralized power company, although most in Wyoming seem to be smaller and localized, which is good.
-
Paul, you hit the nail on the head.
Speaking from the construction side, our cost to complete a project is virtually unchanged as the tax credits and subsidies wax and wane. What really changes on the comercial side is the price of the turbine itself, when sudsidies are strong the manufacturers realize they can charge more, demand is higher as investors attempt to capitalize. The commercial payoff periods are catching up to the traditional energy sources without tax incentives, but we are not quite there yet.
On the homestead side of things, the returns flux with the free market, the only benefit of the commercial regulation being the ability to piggy back on new technology that is innovated by the big boys.
manfromnevada, while some of your statements are a little strong and possibly dated, i agree on one point, let the free market decide. Nuclear is the clear way to go, modern systems are cheap and efficient, smaller plants are feasible with the ability to be distributed across a grid, from 20MW to 1000MW, good luck with the government regulation though, not to mention NERC AND FERC tightening grid requirements
FDNYliberty, thanks for the vote of confidence, I would be happy to answer any questions you have.
And finally, the molten cells are electrolytic, but their operating temp is somewhere around triple boiling, not a roadblock by any means, but you may want the stored in the middle of nowhere, perhaps WY :^) Flywheels present a similar problem, that is a lot of energy stored, a little unbalance and that thing will go off like a bomb. Underground pressurized storage could be a possibility in that nice rock bed in wyoming.
-
I'm just pointing out that "alternative energy" is not the panacea that many people purport it to be.
Too many people think, "I'll just put up a windmill and get FREE energy!"
I only wish it were the case. I would have done it here.
When you invest and build an energy system, YOU own it, YOU maintain it, YOU repair it, and YOU live with the limited power output. I doubt many air conditioning systems are connected to a wind turbine system. Nor heat pumps. Nor electric heat. Nor electric clothes dryers. Nor electric ranges. Light bulbs? Yes. Computers? Yes. Refrigerators? Yes.
The point is that it changes the whole dynamic of your household energy consumption.
It's like the difference between having city water and sewer vs. your own well and septic.
The former is convenient. THEY own the infrastructure. You simply connect. You don't have to do a thing, but the fees are outside of your control.
The latter comes with the baggage of a pump failure, lightening strike, lowered water table, over-filled septic tank, plugged leachfield, or water logged leachfield after a long wet spring.
As long as people get all the facts and make a decision with eyes wide open then that's fantastic. The one real plus is independence from the outside world as far as electricity is concerned. Keeping in mind that what you don't consume in electrical energy probably has to be made up with propane unless you're using wood to heat water, heat your home, and dry your clothes.
Mac
-
Like I said. COAL :D
-
Jim Davies did a good article on Thorium
http://www.theanarchistalternative.info/zgb/11A081.htm (http://www.theanarchistalternative.info/zgb/11A081.htm)
Thorium by Jim Davies, 3/23/2011
and followed up with an article on a very promising harnessing of underseas volcanic vents
http://www.theanarchistalternative.info/zgb/11A089.htm (http://www.theanarchistalternative.info/zgb/11A089.htm)
Outside the Box by Jim Davies, 3/31/2011
:( Unfortunately, neither are likely to scale down to fit in my back yard...
-
Wind energy isn't out of reach to private owners, there are actually quite a few people with personal wind turbines in Iowa. In fact, as I recall Alliant Energy had a deal where you can actually get paid for any excess power you produce, sort of a "meter runs backwards" deal. But then again we have to have all our coal shipped in from Wyoming by train. ;)
Here's the latest update to an ongoing dilemma one of my old college buddies had in MN with his own private wind turbine. Sounds like another good reason not to get too comfy in MN!
http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/local/article_40aa79a8-f459-11df-bddf-001cc4c03286.html (http://www.winonadailynews.com/news/local/article_40aa79a8-f459-11df-bddf-001cc4c03286.html)
From a personal standpoint, wind really does sound like a practical alternative energy, albeit with a few drawbacks. If we got the battery situation figured out many of those drawbacks would be reduced or eliminated. But even with the current drawbacks, wind still makes a good supplementary power source by reducing your dependency on grid power.
-
adambomb said:
"From a personal standpoint, wind really does sound like a practical alternative energy, albeit with a few drawbacks. If we got the battery situation figured out many of those drawbacks would be reduced or eliminated. But even with the current drawbacks, wind still makes a good supplementary power source by reducing your dependency on grid power."
You just can't wish it to be true. Some places just don't have much wind. Some places are up in a canyon with 75' pine trees (like mine), so wind will NEVER be practical here. You can't harvest something that's not there. Like wanting to use hydro on your property when there's no water!
The turbine in the news article is a Bergey Excel rated at:
Rated Wind Speed: 12 m/s (27 mph)
Rated Power: 10 kW for grid intertie, 7.5 kW for battery-charging
At 1/2 of the "rated speed", at a still brisk 13.5 mph, you'll get 1/8th of the above amounts.
So, for $30K, plus batteries, plus maintenance, you might get 1KW although here at my place the wind seldom even gets to that speed. Just stating the facts.
And actually, no, they don't "turn the meter backward", they typically install a second meter so that one shows your usage and one shows the amount fed back, but the amount fed back is not bought at the same retail rate you pay for yours. It's typically at a wholesale rate that the utility pays for energy from its producers. This is all determined by state regulations and power company rules.
Just make sure you cut thru the hype and know the facts before you buy into such an investment.
Mac
-
adambomb said:
"From a personal standpoint, wind really does sound like a practical alternative energy, albeit with a few drawbacks. If we got the battery situation figured out many of those drawbacks would be reduced or eliminated. But even with the current drawbacks, wind still makes a good supplementary power source by reducing your dependency on grid power."
You just can't wish it to be true. Some places just don't have much wind. Some places are up in a canyon with 75' pine trees (like mine), so wind will NEVER be practical here. You can't harvest something that's not there. Like wanting to use hydro on your property when there's no water!
The turbine in the news article is a Bergey Excel rated at:
Rated Wind Speed: 12 m/s (27 mph)
Rated Power: 10 kW for grid intertie, 7.5 kW for battery-charging
At 1/2 of the "rated speed", at a still brisk 13.5 mph, you'll get 1/8th of the above amounts.
So, for $30K, plus batteries, plus maintenance, you might get 1KW although here at my place the wind seldom even gets to that speed. Just stating the facts.
Where did I state this as a "one size fits all" solution? Iowa just so happens to have some of the highest average wind speeds in the country, and the better part of the state is flat, so in many parts of the state it is viable. From what I recall Wyoming is fairly high on the list of windy states as well. But anyone with that kind of money to invest would clearly want to do some research on their particular location. I assumed that was not worth mentioning.
I will also agree that coal is clearly the best solution for grid power, actually had to do some research on this for a class project a few years ago and that was our determination as well, due to the fact that it is cheap, abundant, and with modern coal plants emissions are perfectly acceptable.
Our studies also showed that wind was the most cost effective alternative energy. And until someone markets a coal plant small enough to power a household, I'd venture to say that if you're looking for an off-grid solution there isn't anything better at the moment, location dependent of course.
And actually, no, they don't "turn the meter backward", they typically install a second meter so that one shows your usage and one shows the amount fed back, but the amount fed back is not bought at the same retail rate you pay for yours. It's typically at a wholesale rate that the utility pays for energy from its producers. This is all determined by state regulations and power company rules.
the "meter runs backward" comment was merely an analogy, hence the quotes.
Just make sure you cut thru the hype and know the facts before you buy into such an investment.
Mac
-
I stand by my last sentence:
Just make sure you cut thru the hype and know the facts before you buy into such an investment.
Location, location, location. Yes, perhaps if you live on the plains of Iowa it would be worthwhile, but not here in the Black Hills. Trying to do so would be like the idiots in San Francisco who spent millions putting solar collectors on their city hall even though SF is frequently cloudy and foggy. You can't harvest something that's not there.
The reason I point out the electric meter "running backward" analogy is that it's misleading. It implies that if I produce an extra 5KW-Hrs during the night when it's windy and I'm asleep, and the next day I consume 5KW-Hrs during the day while it's calm, that it's a wash and I don't have to pay anything. That's not the case since it's not "running backward" and as I said previously there's usually two meters (outgoing and incoming) that keep track of the two different rates that you will receive or pay. Some states FORCE utilities to buy excess energy from consumers, some do not. This is akin to requiring Walmart to buy your excess tomatoes in the summer to make up for the ones you bought during the winter! Best advice is to check with your local utility and find out their policy and requirements. I have no idea what the state of Wyoming mandates in this regard (hopefully nothing at all).
Again, for some people, in certain areas, under certain conditions, with limitations, wind energy can be effective and advantageous. In most other cases, not so much.
Mac
-
I have a Wyoming Master Electricians license. There are a lot of self reliant/survivalist types here that could care less about any subsidies or tax incentives. It is a growing market statewide primarily because many folks are waking to the fact of our probable future. Many do see even the most basic of necessities such as clean water, propane/compressed natural gas and electricity as their OWN responsibility not some large multinational corporation.
Best to show up and look around. We have a face to face culture here. Good luck. ;D
-
Again I say COAL! :D
But if anyone is insistant on making turbines, Im in. :D
-
Glad to hear that people are interested!
The sustainable economics of it really start to work out if you can attach a dollar sign to the value of self reliance.
-
if you can attach a dollar sign to the value of self reliance.
Inputs to that would be the chances of a rate increase and the cost of said increase, the chance of being cut off completely (or priced out of the market in full or part) and the value you place on having electricity. Also the marginal value of higher capacities vs lower ones - including possible profitable sale of such in a SHTF scenario - any subjective value you want to place on intangibles like peace of mind, sticking it to the man, the experience and education gained from doing it, etc., and the present value of the various future gains/losses discounted for the expected time frames over which you predict they will be realized.
Those are all very fuzzy, of course, so you'll want to apply error bars to each input, then find the likely maxima of the combined and weighted probability curves, plus the first or maybe second standard deviations as bounds to your expected scenarios. And don't forget to adjust your capital costs for both expected inflation and depreciation.
Simple really, just plug in those numbers. :D
-
Bonus points for doing that math denominated in gold instead of dollars.
-
The sustainable economics of it really start to work out if you can attach a dollar sign to the value of self reliance.
AGREED! 100%
-
Unfortunately it's fairly difficult to come up with good numbers to compare alternative energy, as there is an incredible amount of hype and emotional attachment for and against it, at least on a broad-brush level, ie trying to decide if coal or wind is "better," etc. You have the hippie camp that is more likely to say damn the cost, it's good for the environment, and anti-hippie camp that says all this frou-frou stuff is a waste of money, and even another hippie camp (I like to think of them as the more Amish hippies in that they are anti-development) that claims the spinning blades are killing bats, etc. Everyone who has done any published research has a bias towards one side or the other, and naturally these published results contradict each other quite a bit.
As a further example of the illogical thought processes normally dedicated to deciding whether or not wind energy is "good," just the other day someone told me that wind turbines are bad because after the big motors in the top spin the blades up, they only make 15% more energy than they consume. First off, anyone who claims they use motors to "spin up" the turbines should probably just keep their mouth shut. The big turbines do have pitch and yaw control motors, but I have a hard time believing they consume that much energy relative to the output, at least over a long period of time. But even if that were the case, you're still producing electricity, and if the fixed costs and operating costs of the turbine are less than the value of the electricity it produces over its life cycle, you are still coming out ahead.
Fortunately at the individual level at least you can look at average wind speeds in a given area, output of a specific turbine, purchase cost, installation cost, estimated life, maintenance costs, etc., and plug those into Kyle's metric and determine if it's "good."
I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but there has been probably a 20 fold increase in the amount of wind farms in Iowa in the last 5 years. And while I'm sure they are probably getting some sort of federal subsidy, for them to put up that many would sure seem to indicate that there is some economic benefit to them as a source of energy. I don't believe the world has gone that crazy just yet. If the growth was solely based on subsidies it would probably be more comparable to the growth of ethanol IMO. But of course these are all owned by the power company, and I don't know that much about growth in privately-owned wind turbines, other than they are available. So to take a look at that, let's go back to more "broad brush" inherent issues with wind energy: As everyone knows, wind energy only works when the wind is blowing. So if your electrical demands aren't in sync with the wind, and it's your primary source of electricity, you're going to need storage, hence the requirements for better batteries as has been mentioned here earlier. On a grid, they basically just "use less coal" when wind output is high. On the other hand, wind is unattractive for grid power due to the cost of transmission; areas with high wind are not necessarily the areas with a lot of electrical demand, so transmission distance is often much higher.
In terms of electrical output, output increases with the length of the blade and height of the tower, which is why there weren't too many popping up until they started making these huge ones. Basically they had to reach a break-even point where the towers became tall enough they could get the output high enough to get a solid net positive. The constraints with making taller towers are, interestingly enough, largely limited by how big of a blade they can get down the highway from where the blade is manufactured to where the turbine is going. Another factor is how to make such large blades cost effectively, which are often made of fiberglass. The foundation is also important, as a very large turbine will have a large drag force at a large height, resulting in a VERY LARGE overturning torque.
So I guess my bottom line is that wind energy, in some applications at least, appears to be an economically sound source of alternative energy, and in some cases the only practical solution for an individual (at least until someone comes out with a "coal plant in a box" for under $50,000 or so :P ). For an individual, storage is most likely an important issue. Net output/efficiency increases with turbine size, so smaller turbines like those sold to individuals may not be as much of a "big winner" as the larger ones the power company uses. But I'm pretty sure my friend Jim in the link above probably ran the cost analysis on it, he's pretty level-headed. Not sure what value he placed on the "dollar value of self reliance" though ;D
For those fortunate enough to have a creek running through their property, this may be of interest, it's a company started in Afghanistan a few years ago by an American engineer that used to work for John Deere:
http://www.remotehydrolight.com/ (http://www.remotehydrolight.com/)
Afghanistan costs (ie somewhat normal rates for material, but labor was $5-10 per DAY) were in the ballpark of $1,000 per kilowatt, with powerheads available that put out in the ballpark of 1-120 kW. With a 10-15 foot column height of water on a stream maybe 3 ft. wide and 12" deep I'm thinking you could produce like up to 60 kW. And it would be a lot more regular/reliable source than wind.
-
adambomb said:
I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but there has been probably a 20 fold increase in the amount of wind farms in Iowa in the last 5 years. And while I'm sure they are probably getting some sort of federal subsidy, for them to put up that many would sure seem to indicate that there is some economic benefit to them as a source of energy. I don't believe the world has gone that crazy just yet.
Two things:
1. I've always marveled at the beautiful blending of fields of crops with huge turbines interspersed. A perfect blending of the two since the corn doesn't effect the wind and the turbines (the noise and view) doesn't effect the corn.
2. One thing that leads to a distortion in the market for wind power besides subsidies is MANDATES. Many states MANDATE what percentage of energy MUST come from "renewables" regardless of the economies. That percentage increases each year as more and more bureaucrats jump on the greenie bandwagon. California has banned coal plants and I think now even bans long term contracts from out of state coal generating plants (they get around it by issuing "temporary contracts". But even more moderate states have MANDATES.
Even here in Wyoming with Powder River Energy, they peddle "green tags".
http://www.precorp.coop/Products/RenewableEnergy/Renewables.cfm
Luckily, this is VOLUNTARY (so far).
Also, what I like about PRECorp is that their solution to "the poor" is again a voluntary program called Operation Roundup:
http://www.precorp.coop/AU/Coop/opr.cfm
They are not charging us, the government is not taxing us, and they are not taking operating revenue to distribute to "the poor". Rather they have a plan to "round up" your monthly bill and the contribution goes to a fund. Since the average "round up" amount comes out to $0.50 due to probability, that makes the typical yearly "round up" contribution to be $6 ($0.50 x 12).
I much prefer this method to the usual government tax on phones so they can "spread the wealth" to other users.
Mac
-
if you can attach a dollar sign to the value of self reliance.
Inputs to that would be the chances of a rate increase and the cost of said increase, the chance of being cut off completely (or priced out of the market in full or part) and the value you place on having electricity. Also the marginal value of higher capacities vs lower ones - including possible profitable sale of such in a SHTF scenario - any subjective value you want to place on intangibles like peace of mind, sticking it to the man, the experience and education gained from doing it, etc., and the present value of the various future gains/losses discounted for the expected time frames over which you predict they will be realized.
Those are all very fuzzy, of course, so you'll want to apply error bars to each input, then find the likely maxima of the combined and weighted probability curves, plus the first or maybe second standard deviations as bounds to your expected scenarios. And don't forget to adjust your capital costs for both expected inflation and depreciation.
Simple really, just plug in those numbers. :D
I love this! Now that you've laid out the workings of the equation you've got me thinking that self-reliance is a currency.
If that's too glib I'll go with "Self-reliance is better than money."
Terence
-
I happen to have just completed a project consulting with a renewable energy association that was trying to train a workforce to install RE systems, mostly on a residential scale. They have experienced a severe lack of demand for their training product, because despite having received government stimulus money to develop training facilities and course content, simply offering training didn't make the demand for the systems materialize.
Many states have Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) that apply to investor-owned utilities. Distributed production via "net metering" is more popular in REC's where codes and regulations are less strict.
-
"Now that you've laid out the workings of the equation"
That's pretty generous there, Terence. I was no less than half serious, but still, it's far from an equation. It's maybe the way to start thinking about an equation, and may be useful for big ticket items, but really, I just do a gut-check and figure self-reliance for energy worth (to me) about $500 a year in additional costs, amortized out over the life of the equipment, and leave it at that. I'm glad you like it, though.
"self-reliance is a currency."
Not a currency precisely, but you are very right in that it would do people a world of good to start thinking of it in business like and economic terms. There's a stuff-that-hits-the-fan-load of tradeoffs in all this, and its too much to balance by gut alone. None of it is scalable if it doesn't leave you with more resources than what you started with, and doing things in the wrong order can leave you in a liquidity squeeze that you might not get out of. I think wind has a place in that, but it has to be done the right way, so at each step you're left with enough resources to go on to the next stage.
As a lot here know, counter-economics is my preferred method of political-ish action (I'm trying NOT to start that argument here, just making an example), and I've long said that it will only ever catch on if it can be made to turn a profit. Self-reliance and preparedness are integral parts of agorism, so your thinking really applies to that as well. I think it applies to other forms of political activism also, though the "revenue" side has to come from a much more abstract kind of evaluation. Either way, I think your (and shat's) observation about "monetizing" self-reliance, extended to other forms of value that fall generally under the broad political activism umbrella, is something worth thinking harder about.
-
Ill do a Coal plant in a box for 9oz Gold. :D
-
Ill do a Coal plant in a box for 9oz Gold.
That's pretty steep. How many megawatts?
-
20kw. :D Megawatts dont fit in a box.
-
"20kw. "
Nominal or peak? So lets see, typical home use is, what, 1.5 kW average, maybe on the order of 5 as a peak?
So this will provide peak power to 4 homes (.15 Algores), or average power to maybe 12. Whats the fuel cost on that? How much does it cost for the wiring and other circuitry to distribute the power? How long will the box last and what is the efficiency curve as it ages?
For a small community of closely spaced homes (disregarding transmission losses for now), it looks like its in the ballpark of feasible, pending more hard numbers.
-
A standard electric water heater, like mine, is 4.5KW.
And electric dryers are on a 30A 220VAC circuit so that's probably another 4KW (20A).
Through in about the same for an electric stove?
Could be 12KW right there unless you start balancing stuff and forcing sequencing.
Forget about air conditioning . . .
Mac
-
"Could be 12KW right there unless you start balancing stuff and forcing sequencing. "
Hmm, you mean the statistics I looked up on the internet weren't right? (Or maybe my math was wrong).
I'm thinking in a self-reliant, or full/partial off-grid situation, balancing, sequencing, and short-term storage is probably worth the effort. Plus, solar for things like hot water is, as far as I know, way more efficient than it is for electric, so you could probably cut out the middleman and its load for that at least.
You could run your dryer from compost heat, or natural gas from dog waste. :D
-
Ok I can make 5kw too. But 20kw is more efficient. The same 20kw will also produce about 100 gallons of hot water per hour or heat your house too. You can live on 1.5kw if it is produced and stored for peak use such as in batteries.
-
Do you mean the coal box gives off that much as waste heat? Or that it can do that instead of generating electricity? Or that 20kW of electricity will heat that much water?
Yeah, anything not on grid is going to require something to dampen the fluctuations. Trying to provide for peaks that will only happen for minutes per day is too inefficient. Even distributed to multiple households, typical usage patterns mean that several individual peaks will coincide more than once in a while.
I do think that at first blush, this looks feasible, though I'd need to know a lot more details. Can't do much about it till I get up to Wyo, though.
-
That is an excellent point with the waste heat. Many of the buildings at Iowa State are heated with waste heat from the power plant via steam. That would be an excellent source of house heat and water heat. With a bit of craftiness it may even be possible to convert a clothes dryer to utilize this heat (I'm imagining replacing the heating portion in a gas dryer with, say, a heater core or two from a large van connected to the steam pipes?).
If it's unfeasible to generate enough power for air conditioning, it would be all the more reason to go for something that doesn't have as much need for it, like an earth home. I've always liked those anyway. And reducing the loads on the rest of the system would also go a long ways.
Another option, thinking outside the box with a wind system with batteries, would be to just say to hell with 120V AC and run everything RV style, depending on how "rustic" you can live with. Could probably augment it with solar on a 12V system. Have an inverter to run power tools and some select appliances as needed.
So this will provide peak power to 4 homes (.15 Algores), or average power to maybe 12.
LOL, 4 homes = 0.15 Algores. I can see the advertisement for this coal plant in a box now: "Delivers 0.15 Algores of power for only 9 oz. of gold!"
-
"Could be 12KW right there unless you start balancing stuff and forcing sequencing. "
Hmm, you mean the statistics I looked up on the internet weren't right? (Or maybe my math was wrong).
I'm thinking in a self-reliant, or full/partial off-grid situation, balancing, sequencing, and short-term storage is probably worth the effort. Plus, solar for things like hot water is, as far as I know, way more efficient than it is for electric, so you could probably cut out the middleman and its load for that at least.
You could run your dryer from compost heat, or natural gas from dog waste. :D
Nearly every electric HW heater I've seen is 4.5KW. They have two elements, top and bottom, both are 4.5KW, but only one ever comes on at a time to limit the max power. I just looked at the Home Depot website to look at a typical 30" freestanding electric range.
Broiler: 3,400W
2 large surface burners: 2,500W (each)
2 small surface burners: 1,200W (each)
No mention of baking element.
My heat pump / AC requires a 40A 220V breaker for the compressor and fan and TWO 60A 220V breakers for the two backup heat strips when it gets too cold.
Obviously, all of the above is out of the question when using "alternative" energy. Having to say, oops, I can't turn on more than one surface burner at a time, can't turn on any if I'm baking, can't run the well pump at the same time the water heater is running, and can't run the AC at all, just isn't going to work.
You can install a propane tank for hot water heating, clothes drying, and cooking, but up where I live I can't get propane for 1/2 the year due to the road conditions, so it would need to be a BIG tank.
But again, it does go back to lifestyle. If you want the independence but don't mind having to turn off one thing before you turn on the next, or wait until the next sunny warm day to do your laundry, then great.
Mac
-
I grew up in a house with no electricity. We heated it with wood, cooked with wood, used oil lamps for light, Made our own oil from beef fat. Hot water came from a 55 gallon drum in a box with a piece of glass tied over it. Had to drain it every night in the winter but we had hot water. Water came from a well with a hand jack pump in the kitchen.
-
Hello all, prospective FSW member checking in from MN. I grew up in ND and enjoyed the life style and politics of the area, unfortunately the job market i chose (wind energy, don't judge, i just enjoy power/substation engineering) took me all across the country in 6 month stints, finally accepting a promotion and settlng in MN very recently. As I started paying attention to the local politics, i quickly realized that this place offends me and while the rural areas are okay, they are quickly sliding the wrong direction. In short, i am on the verge of settling here, buying a house, and attempting to start a family and i am having second thoughts.
Now on to the meat and potatoes, I have a pretty good background in the wind industry, spending the last five years working for the largest wind turbine construction company in the states. I stared as a field engineer, but worked my way up to electrical superintendent within a year and subsequently ending up now in a position as an engineering and operation manager. I enjoy the work and would be most qualified to continue in the same vein, but the whole subsidized industry continues to rub me the wrong way. What is the climate for that type of work, both within the FSW and in the Wyoming economy?
There are quite a few paths I could take (master electrician in mn and taking my mn professional engineer test in october, which could transfer after a year by reciprocity), but I do enjoy the work and switching fields would undoubtably mean a cut in pay, i suppose conversely it would also mean freedom from an industry that is heavily dependant on the whims of the government.
Either way, glad to finally make my first post and hear from you folks.
int ro to fsw int ro to fsw Saved seconds ago Saved seconds ago Refresh
Sounds like you are a PERFECT match for what Wyoming has to offer. Southern Wyoming has quite a few wind farms. Arlington (along I-80) has one of the highest average wind speeds of any place in the US AND south of Rawlins they are planning a titanic wind farm. They are in the process of getting all their permits and should be starting in 2012. They've held several community meetings already. No idea why, virtually nobody lives out there. In conjunction with the wind farm, they are building a big substation AND a big power line leading to CO? or NV, can't remember which.
I agree with one poster. Work for one of the big wind energy firms and help/start your own small business on the side.
One thing that most people are forgetting when it comes to wind energy is that we are having constant rate increases. Across the nation the utilities have been bending over customers with 15% increases and more. So its hard to compute the ROI when rate increases are coming so frequently.
That's one thing we have in abundance in southern Wyoming - wind, (also wind carried garbage, did you know the plastic bag was the state flower?)
-
did you know the plastic bag was the state flower?)
Hah! I thought it was the state bird.
If you want the independence but don't mind having to turn off one thing before you turn on the next, or wait until the next sunny warm day to do your laundry, then great.
Here's the thing... I don't see that as being a natural dichotomy - either independent and completely disconnected from the world and living like a relative primitive, or connected, modern, and subsumed into the collective. Sure, we pretty much only have those two choices at present. The only way out of the system is to go it mostly alone. But it doesn't have to be that way. One of the things I see as a big benefit of "concentrating" people who want more independence is that they can build an interdependent network. Not collectivized, not one for all and all for one, but also not isolated and alone. and with only what you can make with your own hands Instead, self-sufficient in the sense that one makes or trades for what he needs, but trades honestly, without all the collective restraints about "our" resources and a "social contract" that forces us to sacrifice to our neighbor instead of helping him out.
It's not going to happen overnight, and for now we each have to choose what level we want to be in or out of the system, but the potential is there. Humanity built civilization from the caves once, we can build it again, from the depths of this collectivist pit we've all been thrown into.
-
One of the things I see as a big benefit of "concentrating" people who want more independence is that they can build an interdependent network. Not collectivized, not one for all and all for one, but also not isolated and alone. and with only what you can make with your own hands Instead, self-sufficient in the sense that one makes or trades for what he needs, but trades honestly, without all the collective restraints about "our" resources and a "social contract" that forces us to sacrifice to our neighbor instead of helping him out.
It's not going to happen overnight, and for now we each have to choose what level we want to be in or out of the system, but the potential is there.
Another breath of fresh air, Kylben. Your recent posts hint at, or describe directly, the core of human abundance.
The magic of the algebra is that all of the objects are unquantifiable yet the relationships are undeniable; evidence of the agora unseen.
Terence
-
GD said,
One thing that most people are forgetting when it comes to wind energy is that we are having constant rate increases. Across the nation the utilities have been bending over customers with 15% increases and more. So its hard to compute the ROI when rate increases are coming so frequently.
Actually, it's easy to factor a 15% annual cost increase into ROI calculations. Nobody knows the future, but certain estimates can be made. But also remember that some of these increases are caused by government MANDATES that require utilities to BUY "alternative" energy even though it is more expensive. I don't think the cost of coal has gone up much, if any.
"Under my plan, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket." (Obama)
And Kylben is right about a community utility. I know a couple of friends whose development has a community well and they all pay an annual fee to maintain it. I guess the same could be done with a larger wind turbine although you'd still have the problem of storage. There is still no practical electrical storage systems for large energy amounts.
Mac
-
There is still no practical electrical storage systems for large energy amounts.
The molten salt battery technology looks promising, and is beyond the lab stage, but not quite to the commercial stage - though they claim to have all the kinks worked out and that its just a matter of gearing up plant to produce them. I've glanced at the concept, and it seems somewhat amenable to a DIY effort, as well. The basic idea, as I understand it, is that salts (not NaCl, or at least not only that) heated to their melting point (something like 3X water boiling point, I think) ionizes them such that they can store charge in large amounts for long periods of time by chemically recombining with the other materials, and are easily "stackable". How they are brought to temperature, and if they have to remain molten after being charged, I'm not clear on. They're supposed to be much safer and less toxic than lead-acid, while also having higher capacity, though they are probably not useful for small, portable applications like cell phones.
The community utility idea, I was mainly thinking of those coal generator boxes, but any generating tech could be done in that way.
-
As I said, There is still no practical electrical storage systems for large energy amounts.
The problem with electrical energy is that it must be produced at the instant it is required, quite unlike a tank of propane, a pile of coal, a cord of wood.
Electrical generation by turbines using coal, oil, gas, nuclear, and even hydro produces it on the fly, as is required, moment by moment.
Solar and wind are by their nature sporadic, variable, and unpredictable, and perhaps totally unavailable at times in various areas.
That makes them problematic since they are not reliable. If you don't have a grid system to back you up then you need more and more storage and expense to get you over the dead periods. How many days of cloud cover or calm days can you afford to bridge? Two? Three?
Just as there is a value to being independent and "off grid", there is a value to having reliable and near limitless electrical energy at your fingertips without worrying about sequencing your appliances or how many more windless days are forecasted.
It all depends on what happens in the future. If all hell breaks loose and the entire electrical infrastructure fails, then the guy with his own wind/energy system will be king of the hill. On the other hand, if all continues pretty much as it has, then buying electricity from your local utility for 5.5 cents per KW-Hr and not having a concern about investment or maintenance comes out on top.
Who knows?
Mac
-
It all depends on what happens in the future. If all hell breaks loose and the entire electrical infrastructure fails, then the guy with his own wind/energy system will be king of the hill. On the other hand, if all continues pretty much as it has, then buying electricity from your local utility for 5.5 cents per KW-Hr and not having a concern about investment or maintenance comes out on top.
So, let's say you're already hooked up to the local utility for electric and you'd like to setup a modest backup 'off-grid' solution.
Narrowing the scope to electricity is there a current alt form that makes sense? Let's assume that the property in question
has whatever resources/inputs necessary for the system proposed (Wind if wind is needed, wood if wood is needed,
a source of coal if that's needed, etc.).
Terence
-
setup a modest backup 'off-grid' solution.
What is more modest than a Honda generator that can be fueled by gasoline and/or propane?
-
is there a current alt form that makes sense?
I don't think there is one single "killer app", it depends on what you need and what's available where you are at. A couple of things though, "alternative" energy isn't so much the important thing (in my thinking at least), but off-grid. It's just that most of the off-grid options also happen to be alternative technologies, though crappie's coal-in-a-box could have some potential, and it is anything but "alternative". Also, not all of your energy needs have to be provided by electricity. There are lots of off-grid options for things like heating and cooling that never need wires. Franklin stoves, geothermal, etc. There's even some cooling "technology" that's been used in the middle-east and asia for many centuries that involves burying blocks of ice in the winter, and through ingenious home construction keeps the house cool most of the summer. Then there's gas. Lots of ways to produce that, especially if you're willing to recycle everything you produce in the way of waste. Some places in Africa use their cattle waste for natural gas for cooking and heating. People use composting to generate heat (and good soil) for their greenhouses in winter.
We're a bit spoiled by the grid into thinking that all of our home energy has to come through wires, but there's a ton of room for thinking outside that box. Say what you will about hippies, greenies, and their fellow travelers, there's a lot to learn from their websites about doing things like this in a "rugged individualism" and off-grid way, no matter how whacked-out their motives for wanting to might be.
-
Dennis' suggestion of a propane powered generator makes sense. There are conversion kits for many generators to switch from gasoline to propane. At least that way you can have 500 or 1K gallons of energy already stored on site.
This works for short to moderate interruptions in the power system, but there's no way to create propane on site. It would have to be replenished when it ran out.
Every methodology has its scope. Some work well under certain conditions with short interruption (like me using grid power and a gasoline generator), others work better for longer interruptions, and still others work for the other extreme (no grid at all). I don't think there's a perfect "size that fits all".
Mac
-
This site might be helpful. I'm not that familiar with it, but I hear good things.
http://homepower.com/home/
-
That site is the typical greenie energy site. Even had a "great" article on a hybrid cars. Fantastic!
Their business is to promote alternative energy. Look at their sponsors.
Mac
-
That site is the typical greenie energy site.
Yes it is. But as I said above, if you strip out the political and social wackiness, those greenies and the like have some good concrete information. Even they are forced to concede the laws of physics and what it takes to apply them. There's no "green" science, there's just science and not science. I'm sure that site has a mix of both, but I'm happy to leverage their watermelon research, technology, and experience to help with my capitalism.
-
setup a modest backup 'off-grid' solution.
What is more modest than a Honda generator that can be fueled by gasoline and/or propane?
That's funny, Dennis: Between the time I posted that question and saw your answer I was starting
up just such a backup generator. I've been bad about regular non-emergency start-ups and was
reprimanded by a friend, recently, about that!
Terence