USAFA Solar Array

Packer said:
I have nothing against solar. I think it is pretty cool actually. I wrote a h.s. and a college research project on the future of solar voltaics way back in the 80's.
I do question if this is the best use of government capital. We obviously disagree on that point. However, the last few posts have been much more persuasive than


Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...

Lots of rants lately from people on too much political correctness in the forums/world. Instead of saying "misinformed notions on the facts of the acquisition and technology," I just said naive. :wink: Sorry that it offended you.
 
No offense taken but it did make me want to argue and be less inclined to consider your pov.
 
Hornet, Since you are currently involved in this area, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the following:

Since solar only produces when the sun shines like wind only produces when the wind blows, what percent of the nations power could feasibly come from solar? This is a significant issue as it has to intergrate into the grid and we need power 24/7.
 
Packer said:
Hornet, Since you are currently involved in this area, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the following:

Since solar only produces when the sun shines like wind only produces when the wind blows, what percent of the nations power could feasibly come from solar? This is a significant issue as it has to intergrate into the grid and we need power 24/7.
Click to expand...

You've asked the right question. My job right now for the rest of the month is to write up a case study on options for Fort Bliss and this is part of our question for them at the small scale. How much can feasibly come from solar? 100%. But that would cost a fortune. If you wanted pure solar, you would have to massively overbuild solar arrays and take the excess daytime capacity and store it (batteries, pumped hydro, CAES, etc.) for night-time use.

What can I envision as a solution? Here's what I would see or some variation of it. We need an infrastructure program to modernize the entire national grid and interconnect it to allow power wheeling. That allows you to transport solar and wind from high resource areas to low resource areas (west and mid-west to east). We have come close to maximizing our pumped hydro resources (pumped into a reservoir and then dump to produce electricity - widely used in nuclear energy in places like Niagara and TVA) without lots of environmental damage from making our mountains all reservoirs. Instead of using too much storage, a very costly component for renewable tech, I would like to see large geothermal investment in the west and nuclear in the east. Provides a good baseload at night that can be supplemented by wind.

A large connected grid that is intelligent lowers your need for storage as well as baseload generators. Run geothermal, biomass, and nuclear (can even remove the nuclear component if you don't like it) to maintain power quality and "pressure" with your renewables spread across the grid to supplement the baseload. Use future tech like electric vehicle batteries as distributed storage so we don't have to build dedicated storage and can smooth the daily load to eliminate the need for peaking generators.

Part of the future is distributed storage and generation. Reduces the loss from transporting electrons and is more robust to outages. Also makes the consumer directly see the impact of their behavior and they can adjust to the real cost of their consumption. Ultimately, one of the greatest renewable assets we forget is conservation and smart use. Turning the AC up when you're gone, installing a solar hot water heater, etc. are all profitable ways of lowering your energy use so we don't have to build another solar panel.

Well, that was a long rant of discombobulation. Come with me to a pub and I will give the long, more coherent (until the booze kicks in) explanation.
 
Packer said:
Hornet, Since you are currently involved in this area, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the following:

Since solar only produces when the sun shines like wind only produces when the wind blows, what percent of the nations power could feasibly come from solar? This is a significant issue as it has to intergrate into the grid and we need power 24/7.
Click to expand...

What you point out here is the variability in supply from different energy sources.

What also has to be considered is the variability in demand (night vs. day, seasonal, etc.) as well.

Add in energy distribution (different regions need more power on different days - think Air Conditioning load and local weather) and storage (yes, we store energy - think water behind a hydro dam) and this is what the keeps the utility guys (mostly handled by computers these days) on their toes.

In the old days, (before these green energy things) the balancing was simpler with Nukes providing a very steady stream 24x7 between maintenance windows, Coal being similar with a different maintenance cycle, hydro being a spot fuel (depending upon season, flood control and recreational water use issues, etc) and Natural Gas being a low capital investment/high variable fuel cost fill in.

These days, Nuke is starting to show its age (most plants on more more frequent maintenance as they age), Coal is becoming more capital intensive with the new scrubbing requirements, and Natural Gas becoming cheaper. Hydro has made most of its way through the endangered species and other environmental challenges but there isn't much more opportunity out there.

The challenges of Green energy are where to fit into the jigsaw puzzle and as technologies and social requirements change (environmental is a social requirement more than a technological challenge) position itself to attract the patient capital (a thing that unregulated private industry seems to have a problem with these days given the way we over-leverage ourselves) necessary to continue its advancement.

And remember Green is a relative term. No method of harvesting and distributing energy is without harm to the environment. Remember, the automobile was a green alternative to horse pollution. Natural gas despite all the fracking debate looks very promising compared to coal.

We all want clean, abundant, and cheap. My question is which 2 do you choose?
 
hornetguy said:
You've asked the right question. My job right now for the rest of the month is to write up a case study on options for Fort Bliss and this is part of our question for them at the small scale. How much can feasibly come from solar? 100%. But that would cost a fortune. If you wanted pure solar, you would have to massively overbuild solar arrays and take the excess daytime capacity and store it (batteries, pumped hydro, CAES, etc.) for night-time use.

What can I envision as a solution? Here's what I would see or some variation of it. We need an infrastructure program to modernize the entire national grid and interconnect it to allow power wheeling. That allows you to transport solar and wind from high resource areas to low resource areas (west and mid-west to east). We have come close to maximizing our pumped hydro resources (pumped into a reservoir and then dump to produce electricity - widely used in nuclear energy in places like Niagara and TVA) without lots of environmental damage from making our mountains all reservoirs. Instead of using too much storage, a very costly component for renewable tech, I would like to see large geothermal investment in the west and nuclear in the east. Provides a good baseload at night that can be supplemented by wind.

A large connected grid that is intelligent lowers your need for storage as well as baseload generators. Run geothermal, biomass, and nuclear (can even remove the nuclear component if you don't like it) to maintain power quality and "pressure" with your renewables spread across the grid to supplement the baseload. Use future tech like electric vehicle batteries as distributed storage so we don't have to build dedicated storage and can smooth the daily load to eliminate the need for peaking generators.

Part of the future is distributed storage and generation. Reduces the loss from transporting electrons and is more robust to outages. Also makes the consumer directly see the impact of their behavior and they can adjust to the real cost of their consumption. Ultimately, one of the greatest renewable assets we forget is conservation and smart use. Turning the AC up when you're gone, installing a solar hot water heater, etc. are all profitable ways of lowering your energy use so we don't have to build another solar panel.

Well, that was a long rant of discombobulation. Come with me to a pub and I will give the long, more coherent (until the booze kicks in) explanation.
Click to expand...

I'll buy a round...:beer1:
 
Distributed generation is a big deal. Wind is particularly troublesome because it varies fairly unpredictably and because the wind farm sights are concentrated due to geography, large swings in power supply occur. Coal, nuclear and to a lesser extent hydro take a little time to ramp up and down their output.

Solar is more stable but poses similiar issues.

Energy storage is a pricey proposition.

If we all buy a round, I am sure we can come up with a solution.
 
Packer said:
Distributed generation is a big deal. Wind is particularly troublesome because it varies fairly unpredictably and because the wind farm sights are concentrated due to geography, large swings in power supply occur. Coal, nuclear and to a lesser extent hydro take a little time to ramp up and down their output.

Solar is more stable but poses similiar issues.

Energy storage is a pricey proposition.

If we all buy a round, I am sure we can come up with a solution.
Click to expand...

I've read articles about utilities wanting to put NG powered fuel cells housed in customers' homes (garage). Takes a lot of load off the grid and reduces losses in transmission.

This brings me to the bigger challenge facing our energy situation - Capital Investment.

Note that it is the Utilities that want to put NG fuel cells in our home. It is the Government (stimulus money) that sunk large quantities of up-front money in the USAFA's solar setup.

Historically speaking, the electric power industry has been a stable and modestly profitable bunch. It is where widows' and orphans' investments go not to flip a quick profit, but to generate long-term income (dividend) streams, requiring a stable revenue stream and a predictable regulatory environment (both environmental and competitive).

To that end, the "new competition" in the energy business (anything from windmill companies to solar cell manufacturers) who borrow huge sums of money to create equipment capacity without a long term purchaser of said equipment signed. To me, this sends signals of instability which for so many other markets causes troubles long term.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of "patient captial" types of companies involved in the green energy, but it is the hot-money startups that will give the green power industry more trouble (both in publicity and in reliability) than they bring benefits.

Of course, the more of our energy basket we put in the hands of the resource producers (oil/gas/corn/etc) who themselves operate in the speculative world of futures which as we know from recent history can pummel the larger economy. The markets can be a cruel thing with much collateral damage.

And as a final note backing the concept of a stable utility industry that is equity (not debt) financed, look at the power problems in India. When more people get caught in a long-lasting brown-out (repeatedly even) than exist in the North American grid, it reminds me of how good we have it here.

We like to complain about our utility bills, but you do get what you pay for and paying enough up front in developing a good infrastructure, built to deliver reliable and stable cost power does more for the stability of our economy (and by extension our political environment) than any other design.

I need a couple beers now...
 
Great discussion. And the problem gets broader when you facter in greenhouse gases and global warming.
 
Idzak said:
Great discussion. And the problem gets broader when you facter in greenhouse gases and global warming.
Click to expand...

Well, in the discussion of how to transition to a renewable energy economy, GHGs become a moot point. :wink:
 
hornetguy said:
12 year payback ain't bad. http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123317941
Click to expand...

Cape Cod AFS has some of the highest electricity costs in the Air Force at $0.133 per kWh and uses about 13,000 MWh a year. The two turbines will offset more than 50 percent of the station' s annual electrical purchases. The economic benefit is expected to be $1 million per year.
Click to expand...

And that high price has so much to do with the payback period. And that is a commercial price, btw.

With greater environmental legislation (i.e. scrubbers on coal plants), the price of electricity will continue to climb in the current lower cost (mostly coal-fired) areas to this level, making more places good targets for alternative energy projects.

Colorado, being in coal country is not in the high cost region, but who knows perhaps the future savings at AFA as coal power starts ramping down in these areas will increase beyond expectation. The great thing about low variable cost power is that when prices of competing fuels rise, these technologies become even more competitive.
 
goaliedad said:
And that high price has so much to do with the payback period. And that is a commercial price, btw.

With greater environmental legislation (i.e. scrubbers on coal plants), the price of electricity will continue to climb in the current lower cost (mostly coal-fired) areas to this level, making more places good targets for alternative energy projects.

Colorado, being in coal country is not in the high cost region, but who knows perhaps the future savings at AFA as coal power starts ramping down in these areas will increase beyond expectation. The great thing about low variable cost power is that when prices of competing fuels rise, these technologies become even more competitive.
Click to expand...


Indeed. One of the drivers in the western areas has been the renewable portfolio standards as well. Combined with stricter coal plant standards, coal based electricity will certainly start increasing in cost, especially as utilities bring more gas online too.
 
Stealth_81 said:
9/10/2012 - U.S. AIR FORCE ACADEMY, Colo. -- After a year of operation, the data is in. The Academy has received roughly seven and half percent more power than anticipated from the 6-megawatt solar array project that began production last summer.

Stealth_81
Click to expand...

It was awesome project.. It just decreases our reliability on fossil fuels
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top