Green / alternative energy. The good and the bad.
July 17, 2008 1:24 amFrom time to time, I get someone saying “all renewables is rubbish, isn’t it?”. The most recent site I got pointed at was:
http://www.greenliving.co.uk/Articles/theeconomiccasef.html
I read that site and hung my head in despair. Now, we all know that small scale wind turbines currently don’t pay for themselves, either in carbon footprint payback or financial terms. Would it be great if there was someone who had found a way of making it work out?! Except, as I was reading through, I couldn’t help thinking “what about this? what about that?”. I was twitching to find the “contact” link, when my questions were answered at the bottom:
http://www.greenliving.co.uk/Articles/theeconomiccasef.html#FAQ
It appears “the economic case” puts aside small things like depreciation, maintenance, replacement of batteries, installation costs, etc etc etc.
So, let’s have a brief look at a summarized version of the Q&A (I have abridged but not edited or changed any words)
Q. You haven’t considered the cost of borrowing money to fund the installation.
A: I didn’t factor in the cost of borrowing as I wanted to keep the article simple.Q. Do the battery banks not need replacing periodically?
A. This is a complex area whose costs I cannot accurately quantifyQ. [The article] does not deal with storage issues
A. Regarding how electricity is stored, I deliberately kept that side of the article simple because I did not want to obscure the main argument.Q. Does your calculation include installation costs?
A: No, because these are difficult to quantify.Q. What would the planned maintenance costs be over 20 years?
A. Difficult to sayQ. Are there any maintenance or insurance costs associated with the turbine?
A. A|l turbines need regular preventative maintenance, [...] I have not included these costs.
Riiiight, so as long as you don’t actually factor in any real-world costs, it works out perfectly!
For those of us trying to make a living out of viable energy (solar thermal etc), these kinds of sites don’t help at all - they just make the whole industry look bad.
BTW - grants paid since inception of scheme:
Not very inspiring.
I also read a book, “How to live Off Grid”. Except, it’s not very “how to”.
I’m afraid I have to agree with this review from Amazon (I’d gone there to write almost precisely the same!)
One of the lesser problems with this book is that the author spends too much time talking about himself instead of the subject. For example he writes in detail about his difficulty in finding parking space when he visits one of the off- grid people. He also brags about getting gadgets for free and talks far too much about his family. He seems to brag about rather than describe his off grid place in Spain. He then says that he can not afford a house in the country in addition to his expensive 2 homes and his van.
The very worst problem is that the book is badly structured, in that the details of how each off grid community works is in a separate chapter to the general description of it and it’s inhabitants. It is hard to flick back and forth between chapters. The quality of writing is not the best.The only saving grace is a very good tiny section at the beginning about the history of the grid. There is also possibly useful bit in the chapter about planning permission at the end.
There is also the odd thing, that Nick Rosen admits himself, about the irony of him choosing to drive a van to be “off grid”. I was disappointed.
Additionally, there are some glaring typographical and factual errors - weird things seem to happen with random brackets in several places, and p334 - energy saving bulbs do NOT cost £3.50! They are between 40p and 60p each. Well, the Philips ones do, anway.
Good that it is FSC paper though - I have first edition (2007).
I suppose it’s a good try - but it’s embarrassingly obvious that he must have been on “pay per plug” for the Vodafone 3g card :)
Finally, check out this bit of nonsense from the local paper in the letters section:
Image this - school mums are delivering their little darlings to school past eco-friendly homes that have wind turbines.
A typical British mini-tornado blows up and demolishes a wind turbine.
The knife-like blades shoot about as if from a whirling dervish killing or maiming several of those mums.
Come on! Roll out the nuclear future. The people of Reading cannot wait any longer for this.
Sue Doughty, Twyford
Tags: green
Categories: Uncategorized
3 Responses to “Green / alternative energy. The good and the bad.”
Another problem with wind is that it’s so unreliable. There was a recent reg article saying that it needs to be 90% backed up with coal. On the other hand, it might make sense to use wind to make hydrogen with electrolysis. That way you store up your energy as hydrogen fuel. I read about this being done in the USA.
In computing, it’s well know that if your calculation takes longer than a certain amount of time, it’s better to wait for faster computers. I think renewable energy is a bit like that now: it costs so much that it will be better to wait for more efficient technology.
Still, given that I don’t believe in peak oil or AGW, I’m not too concerned. The economics will work themselves out in the end. The main problem is meddling politicians who think they know better than a free market. E.g. biofuel regulation. And politicians seem to get to decide how electricity is generated. So maybe I am a bit worried…
We are in the midst of an energy crisis. The price of a gallon of gas is sky high and there is a great deal of trouble-brewing in the Middle East, Iraq and Iran and other areas. These problems have made it clear to many United States citizens that we have an oil-driven economy.
As Americans we need to develop new directions for energy supply and the production of it. We certainly need to reduce the dependency on oil and look for alternative resources. Experts believe there is no such thing as cheap oil and they will continue to pay a high price and in the future, it will be much higher. This expense will grow in the future unless we can locate alternative sources of fueling our technologically advanced civilization. We need to find innovative sources that can be alternatives to oil.
http://www.green-alternative.info
Okay, so “Sir Simon D” is just spamming his ad-laden web page. But this kind of language is interesting. “We” this and “we” that. Who are these “we”?
When people say “we need to find innovative sources that can be alternatives to oil” they don’t mean that they’re going to be out there doing it. They really mean “other people need to find innovative sources that can be alternatives to oil for me”. And since other people inevitably will do that when it suits those other people, what with market forces and all, making the statement somewhat redundant, what they really mean is “I want to force other people to find innovative sources that can be alternatives to oil for me”.
They won’t say “force”. They’ll use euphemisms like “subsidy” or “incentives” or “research grants”. But it all boils down to political action and taxes: getting government goons to do the forcing for you.
So I say ignore whiners like “Sir Simon D” and stop worrying. None of these supposed disasters that are constantly predicted ever happen. And forcing other people to “solve” them only ever makes things worse. People always solve problems when they actually become problems because it’s good business.
Care to comment?