Tim, perhaps you should buy some of those
Carbon Offsets
from Al Gore, to help him pay his huge energy bill?
But cut subsidies? Someone already mentioned hell freezing over....
And with the destruction of FL citrus, (canker and the new one, greening) expect juice prices to get higher because the stores think they can pull it off... Nurseries should replant the citrus, as its good for reducing CO2, improving groundwater, habitat for wildlife, and better than development (which is where most of it is ending up).
Agriculture is the oldest industry (Adam tended to the garden before Eve even showed up - but that's another discussion), and is critically dependent on environmental stewardship for its very existence. So, in effect, farmers were the first environmentalists.
I agree that we're not windy enough to successfully run wind farms, but we should look forward to a blended approach (coal, petrol, gas, solar, nuke, etc.) to lower dependence on any one fuel source, as well as increase dependability
Are you saying that even if solar panels are
the right thing to do
you won't put them up because no one is giving you a discount? Is it
right
only when it's cheap?
What about hydro-generators that work off the Gulf Stream? What is that, about a 4 kt average current?
A couple of points.
The Florida citrus industry is questionable agriculture practice.
It is a monoculture, meaning that when one
bug
is a problem it affects the entire industry. The mediterranean fruit fly, burrowing nematode and canker are potential threats to the entire industry.
It requires a very long lead time to attain profitablility. It is, afterall, a kind of tree farming.
Lastly, it is a type of hydroponic farming. As such it requires almost constant fertilization and irrigation, as well as pest control.
Couple that with high labor costs and foreign competition. Florida citrus needs to be looking elsewhere. If not wind then solar.
From Tim's example, it looks like a 15 year break even propostion. Except that the
grove
owner wouldn't have a $600/month electricity bill for each 5,000 square feet. There should be a small, day one profit for each unit of production. Multiply that times 17,000 acres and it is a significant profit. Particularly if given favorable tax treatment.
If you believe that the Iraq war and its cost in blood and treasure is in any way attributabled to dependance on foreign oil, then solar investment becomes a no brainer. Even at current levels of efficiency.
All that is really lacking is the political will to make it happen.
So if all of you driving gas guzzlers will put
solar power
bumper stickers on your big iron, all will be right with the world!!
[1 acre = 43,560 square feet. If 5,000 square feet of solar panels will produce $600 worth of electricity a month. Then 1 acre will produce (43,560/5000=8.712x$600= $5,227.2/month.) Surely you can make a living off those numbers.]
And as far as the wind thing, in Flordia, the
experts
I talked to about wind said Florida just wasn't windy enough. But all winter we get some great wind from the cold fronts, and all summer we get a sea breeze on Both coasts, so I think it would work much better than the Experts from California say it would. It's been blowing 15-20 for a week now! I think I'll go sailing! (that in itself is using Wind Power, right? I mean, I could be on a jet ski...)
You!? I don't think so!
Something that all so often gets forgotten in the great green debate is the cost to the planet of creating the wind tubines or the glass panels in the first place and then trying to dispose of them when they no longer work.
Take the Toyota Prius, one of the favoured green vehicles here in Europe. If you take into account the actual cost of the vehicle in building it and then disposing the cadmium batteries (which are lasting for far less time than first thought), then its far dirtier to the planet than many a gas guzzler.
Me I'm for lots and lots of bio diesel, we can grow it, harvest it and still be less harmful overall than the wind turbines and its totally recyclible. <img src=
alt=
/>
Wind/Solar/biodiesel all need to be a part of the equation, but if we are actually seriously about doing anything quickly enough to actually make a difference there is only one answer and you're not gonna like it - NUCLEAR POWER - We all need to get over three mile island here. The good news is we can buy up all the old russian nukes that osama is trying to get and burn it up and put the waste somewhere WE control. Seriously, nuclear is the only effective solution in the near term. If something terrible happens, a couple of tens of thousands of people may die, but modern reactors are extremely safe. When was the last nuclear incident, oh yeah North Korea tested a bomb while we were bravely tied down somewhere that has more oil for us to kill ourselvs with. If we dont deal with climate change a couple of billion people will be affected hundreds of millions dying. It is painfully obvious what needs to be done - Nuclear energy as a stepping stone to a hydrogen economy run on renewables with the ultimate goal being fusion. Why arent I in charge?
Currently, the initial online costs of a wind farm is approximately 20% higher than a coal fired plant. But after building there's no feeding the monster, no mining or transportation of coal and associated upkeep, or pollution. Wonder how long those turbines crank before they need a rebuild?
Something like 35 states (including FL, but not KS or MO) have adopted net-metering policies. Interesting that most are limited to 10 kW output?
Boy are you gonna get it!!! You used the big
N
in public! How un pc can you get! Even if you are right.
Even the Sierra Club is starting to use the
N
word.
Something like 35 states (including FL, but not KS or MO) have adopted net-metering policies. Interesting that most are limited to 10 kW output?
I'm sure the study has been done. Does anybody know what the cost per KW/hour is from a wind farm compared to coal fired compared to nuclear etc? This needs to include payback and finance costs of the capital equipment and of course the input costs (such as coal) plus maintenance.
Tiger Mike
I20RI, I agree and like I asked above, why not build the Nuke Plants underground? They test Nuke bombs underground. So if there is ever an accident like TMI, no big deal, fill in the hole and dig another one. I mean they even store the spent rods underground, right? And I think France has quite a few nukes, I don't hear too much -bad- about them.
I don't think you'd wanna do it in Florida because of the aquafirs and limestone substrate. Not NIMBY, just not a good idea here.
Why do Nukes have to be so big? Couldn't you build small manageable ones and link them together on the same site. I remember reading somewhere that there are research reactors no bigger than a bowling ball. True or no?
The do have smaller ones that power the Navy's ships and Subs, so I guess they could put one in every small town in America. They wouldn't have to dig such a big hole then! <img src=
alt=
/> The problem then is how do you dispose of the waste, because nobody wants to be the truck driver, all the way to New Mexico! <img src=
alt=
/>
alt=
/> The problem then is how do you dispose of the waste, because nobody wants to be the truck driver, all the way to New Mexico! <img src=
alt=
/>
Now I'm breakin' out the NIMBY! Actually, the military has some pretty big installations. Ft. Bliss, Texas. Ft. Sill Oklahoma, the Avon Park bombing range. I was thinking places like that, rather than downtown Cleveland.
Where is Three Mile Island exactly?
What's a NIMBY?
Mary, NIMBY is an acronymn for Not In My Back Yard. It means; I'm fine with it, as long as you build it somewhere else!
And Three Mile Island is an island in a river near Middletown, Pensylvania. You can see it on Google Earth.
I miss working 40 hr weeks. I've been working 7/12 for too long. My shop is at home, (or my home is at the shop), so that saves on the fuel.... Except the 600+ miles a week running to job sites, and picking up supplies.
Sorry I jumped in before reading the whole thread. I briefly, semi-looked into buying a windmill, a large one. The college in my home town put one up two summers ago with a cost of 1.1 mil. I looked at it purely as an investment opportunity being it has a 10 year return. But that is if you are the one using the electricity, vs just selling it back to the utility company. So it sorta relative, you need a really big electric bill to justify fronting that kind of capital to make the numbers work. As far as killing birds that is more of a problem with the older generation windmills, the smaller ones you see spinning really fast. I think the newer ones max out around 45 rpm... I think. I'm sure it varies on size, been a while since I checked into it. New generation ones are fairly quiet without too much of the WHOOSH as the blades turn. And when it is really really windy they shut em down. They just feather the props and turn them into the wind. I just know that had I actually gone forward with something like that, it would have been the least windy year on record. Like the first month I had my first boat. <img src=
alt=
/>
Total guess here, but I would think that nuclear would be the cheapest, safest, cleanest, and efficient way to make electricity. OK the radioactive thing sucks but it is managable. I have a cousin that is a nuclear clean up tech. He's a project manager of some sort that does the clean up at nuclear sites. He told me that three mile island was blown out of proportion, that there wasn't any real danger. Had the proper steps not been taken like they had then, yes there would have been issues. Chernobyl, I mean come on, if anyone can screw something up in biblical proportions its the Russians. What year did three mile island incident happen? Has technology made it safer? Other than multihulls, and champagne its probably the only thing france has gotten right.
alt=
/> The problem then is how do you dispose of the waste, because nobody wants to be the truck driver, all the way to New Mexico! <img src=
alt=
/>
Nuclear is clearly the way to go these days. In fact, lets all pool our money and we could buy a big ship with a decent sized nuclear reactor and we can go around to all the places that have power outages and hook into the grid and sell the electricity! I would rather have a nuc reactor in my back yard than a coal fired plant. The newer designs have passive safety mechanisms that rely on nothing more complicated than gravity when the [censored] hits the fan.
alt=
/> The problem then is how do you dispose of the waste, because nobody wants to be the truck driver, all the way to New Mexico! <img src=
alt=
/>
Nuclear is clearly the way to go these days. In fact, lets all pool our money and we could buy a big ship with a decent sized nuclear reactor and we can go around to all the places that have power outages and hook into the grid and sell the electricity! I would rather have a nuc reactor in my back yard than a coal fired plant. The newer designs have passive safety mechanisms that rely on nothing more complicated than gravity when the [censored] hits the fan.
Not as far fetched as it may seem. Years ago when a storm took out the power on the south end of Kauai, the Navy came to the rescue. Plugged a ship into the grid, and provided power. Not sure if it was a Nuke.
Didn't they pull an aircraft carrier into N.Y. harbor after 9/11, to provide power to the cleanup site?
Nuclear is still scarey to me. But it may be the only thing between us and a new dark age so I quess we need to get it right.
Turkey Point is a nuclear plant in South Florida that no one ever hears about, because nothing ever goes wrong. The last thing I heard was that it is nearing the end of its usful life and will have to be replaced. That and Castro was planning to bomb it at one time.
Ask and you shall receive.
http:/
This is a story about a proposed Nuclear plant for a small town in Alaska.
It's a very interesting idea with some big security concerns.
Mike Hill
Caleb,
It didn't quite work out that way. The Navy did come in but the hurricane had wiped out the grid so the power didn't get very far.
The main holdup for supply all home depots across the country is state tax incentives. As many of us know the initial installation cost is pretty high. So, it makes better business sense to sell to markets where we can move product faster. The demand is there for solar. I was brought on board to help increase our factory's output. I can't give you any more specifics as solar is a very competetive industry. If you want to see solar panels in your local Home Depots talk to you state legislature to have them implement tax incentives or the like for alternative energy.
If it makes you feel and better even I don't get a discount.
There is also one in Seabrook, NH. I lived 45 minutes form there for two years before I evven knew it was there. That was because of the security concern after 9/11. I have no problems with nuclear power, but I am a fan of being independant of the power company. The section of the grid I'm on now is awful. Last year any time the wind blew over 30 kts the power went out. Plus the power company decided to jack up my rates 150% (may only 100%, but still...) over the next few years. It would be nice to not have to worry about that stuff anymore. And no, I do not have a problem doing my own maintainence.
I recall some research on sodium nuclear reactors which operated at far greater efficiency and generated almost no waste. There were serious engineering issues to overcome (corrosive issues when moisture hit the molten sodium), but I would think that in the 30 years since their initial experiments that they would have figure these out.
And Pete's comments regarding citrus are valid, although I would be comfortable saying those general drawbacks are prevalent in any crop (wheat, corn, sugar, etc.).
But I don't know what point you were making about that. Should we stop growing food in large parcels by people trained for a specific crop and return to subsistence farming? I know of no agricultural area that doesn't suffer from each and every point you outlined.
Or should we just buy our food from other areas (or countries) that have cheaper labor?
I am wary of the danger of competition between energy production and food production. It can only end badly...
Could Florida land be used more efficiently? Perhaps. How much CO2 and other waste is generated by the production of solar panels? Is this offset by the energy generation over the recommended lifespan of the product?
Not saying citrus is better, but the 30 year effective (productive) life of a tree generates a good bit of food, and during the same period, removes a good chunk of CO2 from the atmosphere. Don't know how much CO2 the 125# per acre of N fertilizer produces, but I would think it is offset for the most part.
I wish to hear more on this catsailing/farming site. <img src=
alt=
/>
Jay, I think you've hit on something here. What about sail powered farm tractors??! Kind of like those Blow carts but as a tractor.
Or how about electric tractors. And what about putting wind generators in the farm fields, and still grow crops beneath them, cultivated by electric tractors, charged by the same wind generators. Two birds with one stone.
Hey Hobinick, I grew up in Hampton, NH. While I was in High School they were building that Seabrook Nuke Plant. Because of the TMI accident the second reactor never came on line, and the company that owned it nearly went bankrupt with all the delays. To survive they had to sell off the electricity to New York, Conn. and even Quebeck I think. NH ended up with only about 10% of the output!
My point is: trees take a long time to reach maturity and citrus is not a staple crop. Solar
farming
can become profitable much more quickly. It's just a better business plan.
Corn, wheat, soybeans, melons and most vegetable crops are annuals. In fact, corn is a
heavy feeder
and depletes soil quickly. Soy beans are a legume and actually enrich soil. That kind of crop rotation has been sound agronomic practice for decades, probably for centuries.
When you invest in citrus it is a decades long committment.
The only problem with solar is if the sun isn't shining, you aren't getting any power. Geo thermal is quite successfull in Iceland. Enough to grow fruit commercially in greenhouses there. Newer solar panels work pretty good now even in cloudy conditions, but then you still rely on batteries at night. Potential problems with having a huge bank of batteries sitting in your basement. LED lights have gotten affordable. I've considered when I build a new house to do them through out. The draw is next to nothing compared to a mono-filiment bulb. If everyone could afford to switch over to a low voltage system like that what would that save us in energy across the country?