I was in a conversation today at lunch with a fellow who told me that “wind power is better than anything we’ve ever done for generating electricity”. That made me wonder, how reliable (beyond the constancy of wind issues) is it?
Whenever I drive through Techachapi or Altamont passes here in California I note that there always seems to be a fair number of these three blade windmills that are out of commission. Perhaps failure is more common than one would expect. I found a couple of examples:
And this one also, though I don’t know what the ending for it was like the one above…
Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Karl-
Here are some other cars compared with the Tesla solar PV solution.
(reference) Tesla Roadster (105 mpg, $109K, top speed 125 mph) gives $155,054.
Porsche 911 (20 mpg, $92K, top speed 177 mph) gives $157,920.
Chevy Corvette 2008 (22 mpg, $46K, top speed >175 mph) gives $90,873.
Honda S2000 convertible (22 mpg, $35K, top speed 175 mph) gives $75,473.
So there are lots of choices.
How about a Tata Nano (50 mpg, $2150, top speed ??) at $10,775?
I was comparing the costs based on what can be purchased within the next year, without regard for driving performance other than having as large an EV range as possible. If someone has other suggestions for EV’s, let me know and I’ll post the results. Golf carts don’t count.
Extrapolating cell phone battery performance to vehicle battery performance is not realistic. The auto environment is much more punishing on batteries, because of peak load swings, temperature extremes and vibration.
Karl Heuer, some comments on your (11:19:23) :
“current price of gasoline is $4/gal that equals $.1190/KWh (33.6KWh/gal gasoline)”
I’m an old engineer so you may have different conversion factors, but my references indicate that there are 36.6KWH/gal of gasoline. If so your energy content is low by 9% by my calculations which use 125,000 btu/gal of gas and a conversion of 1 watt=3.413 BTU/hr. I know that ruining gasoline with 10% ethanol reduces the energy value but not 9%.
Your comparison is misleading since the $4/gal is currently too high ($3.27 currently here in NJ.) Another 15% error in assumptions, recognizing that this could go up or down. Keep in mind that the current oil price is artifically high due to OPEC and Democrats restricting supply. There is plenty of oil resources in the US that would significantly reduce cost if we allowed development. Price will come down significantly if we allow untilization of all our resources including shale, oil drilling in ANWR and offshore.
Another point, The pump price of gasoline includes all costs delivered to your auto including federal and State motor fuel costs, maintenance, taxes etc. Your calculations include none of the costs to deliver electricity to the house. My electric bill includes a delivery charge. My house sees no sun in the summer and I save a bundle of $$$ on cooling costs.
Also, of the $4/gal, 40 cents/gallon is a typical road tax cost depending on the state. Another 10% error unless you think electric cars should not pay for roads/maintenance, etc. Also keep in mind that the pump price includes huge tax payments to the Feds states, etc. One large oil Company alone paid over $100 Million in taxes (including foreign) in 2007. Where would this revenue to the governments come from with your scenario? And of course if we developed resources here in the US the foreign taxes would be paid to the USA instead. Not to mention jobs!!
I do not have first hand information to verify your estinated solar panel costs but given the above noted omissions, I would not invest one penny in Solar energy. However there are some obvious holes in your assumptions; e.g.: what if I go away for a month and don’t use the car, or what if I take a trip with your eletric car for more than 40 mile range? Also, I recently heard lobbyest from the solar and windmill community testify in congress under oath that if Congress do not continue the subsidies they would go out of business. Were they Lying? Also I remember that California several years ago mandated a certain % of electric cars. This mandate was eliminated when common sense prevaled.
Finally I believe the best way to decide which is the best energy source is to let the market decide, not Congress, not local politicians, not greenies. Subsidies are corrupting Washington. Once politicians are involved we are bound to make the wrong choice. Just look at Ethanol from corn.
Paminator,
Something I think you may find interesting is how much the KWh/m^2/day can increase with 2 axis tracking
Tampa, FL 6.9
http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/redbook/sum2/12842.txt
Commercially available residential panels have reached or are approaching 15% conversion efficiencies for multicrystalline Silicon, and are also approaching $5/Watt Installed with owner sweat equity
The following 8 KW system is available for $45.4K = $5.68/Watt
http://www.altersystems.com/catalog/798-kw-gridtied-solar-system-with-evergreen-190-watt-solar-panels-and-sma-7000us-p-1701.html
AT an effective solar insolation of 7KWh/m^2/day and 15% efficiency, you get 1.05 KWH/m^2/day output
For fleet vehicles using diesel @ur momisugly 25 mpg ($5/gal) and using the same 11.2 Kwh/gal and for electric efficiency conversion — for vehicles driving 30,000/50,000 miles/yr
10 year diesel cost = $60,000/100,000
Solar installation cost @ur momisugly $7/Watt to provide 51.69/86.15KWH/day ( assuming panels providing 195W/1.5m^2= 33panels/55 panels @ur momisugly 1365/panel installed
= $45,000/$75,000
This allows for a 15K/25K purchase premium per EV, and after 10 years, the “fuel” is free — current panels have an expected service life of at least 25 years.
You can see how quickly the solar PV system pays for itself
BTW if it is for a business, you get to depreciate the PV equipment — like any other business equipment
I think I would rather have a wind mill in my backyard than a nuclear power plant:)
pbndad,
Me too, at least until the first really, really cold snap… 🙂
Don- You bring up lots of important issues. As soon as solar PV recharging an EV becomes cost-effective, the gov’t will be trolling for a piece of the action. My guess is it will appear on the sticker price for the EV.
Anthony- Thanks for the link on the EV. I’ll check back on October 15 when they say pricing will be posted. They claim 0.1 kWh/km, which is a factor of two lower than the Tesla Roadster, and a range of 50 miles, on par with the Volt.
Karl-
The solar PV system you link is grid-tied and does not include batteries. You either need to have net metering available with your utility, or you need batteries. You can’t assume the vehicle can be plugged in for the entire daylight period.
The $5.86/W does not include installation costs by a contractor. In Florida, you are not eligible for the solar rebate unless the installation is performed by a certified contractor. This adds about $3/W – $4/W to the solar installation.
Tracking mounts (single or dual axis) add somewhat to the captured insolation, but the price also goes up. I don’t have numbers handy, but read one article a few years ago that concluded it wasn’t worth the extra cost and increased maintenance problems.
Solar panels slowly degrade. 25 year warranties are usually based on some % of original output. Also, output degrades as ambient temperature goes up, like on a hot rooftop during a sunny day next to a Stevenson screen! There are also losses associated with matching the solar panel optimum operating point to the load, losses in battery charge/discharge, conductor I2R losses, inverter/converter losses, etc. Those details can add up to only 80% available energy compared with panel rating.
Here is my version of your calculation for Florida-
For fleet vehicles using diesel @ur momisugly 25 mpg ($4/gal, less than $3.50.gal for fleet contracts) and using the same 11.2 Kwh/gal including electric efficiency conversion —
for vehicles driving 30,000 miles/yr = 82.2 miles/day = 3.29 gal/day
Annual diesel cost = $4,800
Solar installation cost @ur momisugly $9/Watt (peak) (grid-tied, net metering, fixed-angle) to provide 11.2*3.29 = 36.8 KWH/day ( assuming panels providing 195Wpeak, 80% system efficiency and 5 hours/day sun) = 47 panels
(Approx. 9kW of panels).
At 195*$9=$1,755/panel, that’s $82,485. Less $22,500 rebate = $59,985.
Or install yourself for 195*$6 = $1170/panel, or $55,000, no rebate. A bit less if your time is free.
Borrow cash to purchase solar installation, 7%, 10 years, $60,000 (need contractor install to get loan) gives payments of $697/month = $83,640 total.
That provides 23 years of fuel (including reduced efficiency over 25 year life).
This gives $3636/year for solar fuel.
Compare with $4800/year for diesel fuel.
During 10 year life of first vehicle, solar fuel is $8364/yr vs $4800/yr for diesel. Not so good.
With a 25 year loan, solar fuel is $5,088/yr vs $4800/yr for diesel.
Not sure where to go from here. Diesel, solar array, loan payments are all deductible.
The bottom line will be to find an EV that is comparable in price to a diesel vehicle that provides the same performance for the task to be completed.
**** Alan B says: As someone mentioned, going all nuke is not a good idea because of its inability to load follow. ****
That’s a myth, even among power-plant engineers. Modern nukes can follow load quite well, especially w/boron-moderated feedwater on top of fuel-rod movement. The reason they aren’t typically load-following (they’re simply run at full load) is economics — they’re by far the cheapest plants to run. Fossil plants are more expensive to operate, so they are set to load-following. If generation were mostly nuke, it would prb’ly need some refinement of load-matching techiques & instrumentation for US nukes, but France seems to do just fine.
Don-
US DOE says LHV for gasoline is 115,000 BTU/gal (121MJ) 33.6 KWh
adding ethanol(10%) reduces energy content to 96.7% of normal based on 107.5% energy content in 111.% of volume per the link below
ethanol gasoline mix (10%) would only provide 32.5KWh
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/fuel/pdf/rvp_appbtbls.pdf
paminator-
Sun Electronics in Florida:
$3.48/Watt for the panels
http://www.sunelec.com/
Pardon me for butting in from this side of the pond, but Ive been doing some sums on a scrap of paper. Here in the UK we have something over 30 million cars licensed. Each does say 12,000 mile a year, which at an average speed of 40 miles an hour means 300 hours chugging around – and assuming 40 miles per gallon, then that’s a gallon an hour, or 35 kw hrs (see Don’s post above), multiplied by 300 per car.
That comes out to be an annual power consumption of 315 Tera-watt hours, which is quite a big chunk of the UK total (394 Tera-watt hours). So to move over to electric cars, we are going to have to nearly double our generating capacity.
Oh, and that not including all the HGV’s. And there’s a few of them, too.
I can’t see it happening, personally.
pbndad:
“I think I would rather have a wind mill in my backyard than a nuclear power plant.”
Oh, really? Then you need to talk to these folks: click
Karl,
The Wisconsin Energy Statics is one of the many sources that indicates the energy value for gasoline is 125,000 BTU/gal. With 10% ethanol the value lowers to 120,900 BTU/gal. I can’t expain how the DOE value is less although it may have to do with lower vs higher heating value. Also note that the energy value of diesel is 138,690 BTU/gal so your numbers for the diesel are also off.
Average Energy Content of Various Fuels
——————————————————————————–
1 kilowatt-hour of electricity … 3,413 Btu
1 cubic foot of natural gas … 1,008 to 1,034 Btu
1 therm of natural gas … 100,000 Btu
1 gallon of liquefied petroleum gas(LPG) … 95,475 Btu
1 gallon of crude oil … 138,095 Btu
1 barrel of crude oil … 5,800,000 Btu
1 gallon of kerosene or light distillate oil … 135,000 Btu
1 gallon middle distillate or diesel fuel oil … 138,690 Btu
1 gallon residential fuel oil … 149,690 Btu
1 gallon of gasoline … 125,000 Btu
1 gallon of ethanol … 84,400 Btu
1 gallon of methanol … 62,800 Btu
1 gallon gasohol
(10% ethanol, 90% gasoline) … 120,900 Btu
1 pound of coal … 8,100-13,000 Btu
1 ton of coal … 16,200,00-26,000,000 Btu
1 ton of coke … 26,000,000 Btu
.
1 ton of wood … 9,000,00-17,000,000 Btu
1 standard cord of wood … 18,000,000-24,000,000 Btu
1 face cord of wood … 6,000,000-8,000,000 Btu
.
1 pound low pressure steam
(recoverable heat) … 1,000 Btu
The following site clarifies the high vs lower heating values for gasoline and this does explain the difference indicated above. Note that the assumed efficiency for the gasoline engine already includes the effect of lower vs. higher heating value, so your economic numbers should be based on higher heating value.
http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html
Karl, Don-
Don is right about the energy content for gasoline. I used Karl’s number without checking. Regular has 36.4 – 36.6 kWh/gal, and premium is 41.3 kWh/gal.
That changes my spreadsheet numbers a bit (but not much, because EV’s are pricey).
Updated 10 year costs for EV w/solar PV in sunny climate, and ICE’s, in decreasing order-
Tesla EV- $162K
Porsche 911- $158K
Chevy Volt EV- $94K
Chevy Corvette- $91K
Honda S2000- $76K
Ford Flex- $69K
Zev2Go (tiny EV)- $41K
VW Polo- $37K
Honda Civic- $34K
Toyota Yaris- $33K
Smart 4 Two (tiny)- $32K
Actually I could sleep with that. I use a fan every night for the white noise, have for years, since I worked nights. It helps block little noises that would normally keep me awake. But I certainly wouldn’t want to listen to it all day. People usually move out to the country to get away from the noise.
Don and Paminator- You are correct as to the HHV numbers for gasoline, but are incorrect in applying the HHV to IC engines.
I am correct to use the LHV for gasoline because the application is an IC engine. In internal combustion engines, the water of combustion is not condensed, it is exhausted and the thermal energy is therfore lost.
If gasoline was being used in some putative system, where the downstream water of combustion could be condensed (therefore recovering the heat) it would be valid to use the HHV.
Cheers
Karl- The HHV number is the energy available in the gasoline. How the vehicle uses (or doesn’t use) the energy supplied to it is rolled up into the actual vehicle energy needs per mile, for both ICE’s and EV’s.
Paminator-
The HHV includes energy content that is not avaliable to do work — unless captured through condensation, and should therefore be excluded from the energy content identified as available to the car.
That is why the US Department of Energy used the LHV value in the link I provided.
I am right about this.
Lower Heating Value:
“The LHV assumes that the latent heat of vaporization of water in the fuel and the reaction products is not recovered. It is useful in comparing fuels where condensation of the combustion products is impractical …” (like in a car)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lower_heating_value
But — in the interest of settling on agreeable metrics for the continuation of this discussion, and any future discussions let us identify the cost per mile driven and then calculate economic break-points for both gasoline and ev
Moderators:
The (17:50:11) is classic content spam.
Reply – Thanks… Zapped. – Dee Norris
[…] Wind turbines and neighborhoods just don’t mix It seems. Would you want one of these to do this when a wind storm comes your way? Wind power has it’s pluses and minuses, just like any […]
Found a great wind about the wind farms from UK:
http://www.ivc6.com/greenfieldtv/outofcontrol1.html