Solar power & Wind Power for residental use

[buickanddeere]

Just guessing but perhaps a wind tunnel for aviation testing ? The H2S blowers were only 18Kw each , two per upgrader so four in total with both banks in operation.

 

[Egon]

Some more information. Can't validate it.

[video]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/solar-power-surging-to-forefront-of-canadian-energy/article19786759/[/video]

 

[KennyG]

Some more information. Can't validate it.

[video]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/solar-power-surging-to-forefront-of-canadian-energy/article19786759/[/video]

Math is fun. This is a 10 MW installation on 120 acres. Ontario has about 130,000 MW of electrical generation capacity. To replace this capacity would take about 13,000 of these installations, or about 2500 square miles of solar panels. Of course, the capacity factor of solar is relatively low, so maybe 5000 square miles (and the required storage technology, yet to be invented). That's a lot of glass.

Not wanting to start another argument, but it clearly will require a mix of solutions to move away from fossil fuels.

 

[truckdiagnostics]

Math is fun. This is a 10 MW installation on 120 acres. Ontario has about 130,000 MW of electrical generation capacity. To replace this capacity would take about 13,000 of these installations, or about 2500 square miles of solar panels. Of course, the capacity factor of solar is relatively low, so maybe 5000 square miles (and the required storage technology, yet to be invented). That's a lot of glass.

Not wanting to start another argument, but it clearly will require a mix of solutions to move away from fossil fuels.

Near as I can figure that is about the size of Connecticut, puting things in perspective. List of US States By Size, In Square Miles

 

[Redneck in training]

Just guessing but perhaps a wind tunnel for aviation testing ? The H2S blowers were only 18Kw each , two per upgrader so four in total with both banks in operation.

Yes. It is at NASA test facility. It takes small Boeing commercial jet full size. I have been inside of the compressor.

 

[OldMcDonald]

I wasn't purposely attacking anything or anybody personally. My apologies when it comes across that way. I was addressing the facts that the typical reader would not know or think of asking about. And thank you, I do try to be entertaining if and when possible. I also do stage theater. Big Chief in Peter Pan, the pantomime was the latest.

......... Wind and solar fine, but they get paid the same wholesale grid rate as everybody else. Wind and solar is actually a worthwhile addition to small isolated electrical grids without baseload power. That primarily generate with imported diesel fuel in turbo diesels and gas turbines. Where wholesale electrical prices are 20+ US cents per Kw/hr. Hawaii and maybe Alaska for a developed country.Small undeveloped countries glad to have some power at any time. Haiti comes to mind as just one.

B&D, Accepted. Many of your posts DO come across as personal attacks on people, but I think your biggest problem - not for yourself, but for other posters, is your complete inflexibility to accept that renewables have their place in the so-called "developed" world. You will note from my previous post that Portugal produced about three-quarters of its energy generation from renewables in 2014. This is increasing. Most of the production (about 50% of requirements) is from wind and only a small amount from solar, yet Portugal is a very sunny country. The reason is that the people who generate the power know that wind is far more economical for them.

The link to the big Canadian solar sites (where the developers are to be paid 3 times the retail price for 20 years) would suggest that solar is not economic in Canada either. So why build these huge areas of panels? Wind would seem a better alternative, but then we have NIMBYS. Fortunately, not in Portugal. One of my prime reasons for continuing with wind in preference to solar in any country is that all the land under the wind turbines is capable of being grazed by farm livestock - which is what happens on all those I have seen in Britain. The land is unusable for any other purpose under solar panels, so it is lost to food production. Not a good idea.

I totally agree with you that in an ideal world no industries would be subsidised, but that is never going to happen. Even an original subsidy such as the EU agricultural one has been messed about to the extent that big business receives most of it. The original plan was to subsidise small scale landholders in an effort to keep them in the countryside rather than them move to the cities where it costs a lot more to provide them with all the necessary infrastructure - a subsidy to city dwellers!

 

[KennyG]

Ontario is also building wind farms, again subsidized under a different structure than the US subsidies. In both the US and Canada, wind farms have another hidden subsidy. They are almost always built along major transmission lines developed for large coal and nuclear units. There is a large cost associated with transmission lines if they are dedicated to wind power because the low capacity factor makes the effective cost of transmission about three times that of nuclear or coal.

 

[buickanddeere]

On the 2014 power bill. 4% of the power was green and accounted for 20% of the energy cost.

 

[buickanddeere]

B&D, Accepted. Many of your posts DO come across as personal attacks on people, but I think your biggest problem - not for yourself, but for other posters, is your complete inflexibility to accept that renewables have their place in the so-called "developed" world. You will note from my previous post that Portugal produced about three-quarters of its energy generation from renewables in 2014. This is increasing. Most of the production (about 50% of requirements) is from wind and only a small amount from solar, yet Portugal is a very sunny country. The reason is that the people who generate the power know that wind is far more economical for them.

The link to the big Canadian solar sites (where the developers are to be paid 3 times the retail price for 20 years) would suggest that solar is not economic in Canada either. So why build these huge areas of panels? Wind would seem a better alternative, but then we have NIMBYS. Fortunately, not in Portugal. One of my prime reasons for continuing with wind in preference to solar in any country is that all the land under the wind turbines is capable of being grazed by farm livestock - which is what happens on all those I have seen in Britain. The land is unusable for any other purpose under solar panels, so it is lost to food production. Not a good idea.

I totally agree with you that in an ideal world no industries would be subsidised, but that is never going to happen. Even an original subsidy such as the EU agricultural one has been messed about to the extent that big business receives most of it. The original plan was to subsidise small scale landholders in an effort to keep them in the countryside rather than them move to the cities where it costs a lot more to provide them with all the necessary infrastructure - a subsidy to city dwellers!

Wind and solar Costs more per KW/hr than a utility grid with nuclear base load generation is large industrialized nations .
Wind requires a 2nd backup redundant full capacity generating system. No $$$ is saved and it actually costs more.
CO2 is still spewed from the stacks during spinning reserve .The typical member of the public however has no idea and think all the electricity is sourced from wind .
There is perception and then there is reality.

 

[buickanddeere]

B&D, Accepted. Many of your posts DO come across as personal attacks on people, but I think your biggest problem - not for yourself, but for other posters, is your complete inflexibility to accept that renewables have their place in the so-called "developed" world. You will note from my previous post that Portugal produced about three-quarters of its energy generation from renewables in 2014. This is increasing. Most of the production (about 50% of requirements) is from wind and only a small amount from solar, yet Portugal is a very sunny country. The reason is that the people who generate the power know that wind is far more economical for them.

The link to the big Canadian solar sites (where the developers are to be paid 3 times the retail price for 20 years) would suggest that solar is not economic in Canada either. So why build these huge areas of panels? Wind would seem a better alternative, but then we have NIMBYS. Fortunately, not in Portugal. One of my prime reasons for continuing with wind in preference to solar in any country is that all the land under the wind turbines is capable of being grazed by farm livestock - which is what happens on all those I have seen in Britain. The land is unusable for any other purpose under solar panels, so it is lost to food production. Not a good idea.

I totally agree with you that in an ideal world no industries would be subsidised, but that is never going to happen. Even an original subsidy such as the EU agricultural one has been messed about to the extent that big business receives most of it. The original plan was to subsidise small scale landholders in an effort to keep them in the countryside rather than them move to the cities where it costs a lot more to provide them with all the necessary infrastructure - a subsidy to city dwellers!

Wind and solar Costs more per KW/hr than a utility grid with nuclear base load generation is large industrialized nations .
Wind requires a 2nd backup redundant full capacity generating system. No $$$ is saved and it actually costs more.
CO2 is still spewed from the stacks during spinning reserve .The typical member of the public however has no idea and think all the electricity is sourced from wind .
There is perception and then there is reality.