I have long been associated with wind energy, for in the middle 1970's I chaired the Wind Power Division of the American Solar Energy Society, then went on to assist Congress pass the first bill on this subject when I worked for the U.S. Senate from 1979-82. To my surprise and pleasure, wind energy subsequently became the only solar option to be competitive with coal and nuclear for the production of electricity. Depending on which statistics you use, either the USA or China is #1 in wind energy ("combined, both countries generate almost half the world total"). But Europe is coming on.
This general euphoria, however, has more recently been tempered by a range of issues and setbacks:
- As windfarms are located away from population centers, the matter of who pays for line connectivity has come into play. Wheeling responsibility can double the cost of wind energy.
- The not in my backyard (NIMBY) attitude has served to delay and terminate ambitious wind projects. This resistance comes from bird lovers, those concerned about aesthetics and noise, certain elements of the local population desiring maintenance of current lifestyles, etc.
- Growth has leveled off, and last year actually declined to 2007 installation numbers, but, as the above bar graph shows, there was an exponential rise in total capacity, while the following projection to 2020 has also been published:
Frankly, I think the above increase represents either wishful thinking or oil at 200/barrel.
- Continuation of the production tax credit is stumbling around in Congress, and the combination of termination of the ethanol incentives and general budgetary headaches has made renewal questionable, if not doubtful. Elimination of this measure would severely curtail development in the U.S.
- Windpower is not baseload, for the winds come and go. Utilities have thus, for good reason, limited penetration to between 15% and 30% so that power quality can be maintained. Storage options are available, with pumped storage the most economical if natural conditions exist, and air compression appearing to have some promise, but this added cost is a seriously dissuading factor in any analysis.
However, all things considered, wind energy is "twice" as cheap as other solar options, and will continue to grow for the next century.
Wind machines are also getting bigger, with the larger systems being designed for offshore ("in the ocean") applications. A good rule of thumb is that 1000 MWs ("as in Honolulu") can supply electricity to a million people.
Enercon of Germany has been selling 6 MW ("but several were designed for up to 7.7 MW") machines ("above") for four years now, and 19 are installed or soon to be be commissioned. The current largest marketed turbine is a Vestas 7 MW device ("but this has not yet been built"), where one propeller blade ("below", r"emember, there are three") will be as long as nine London double-decked buses.
A British company has announced the 10 MW Aerogenerator to supply electricity for up to 10,000 homes. From tip to tip, the distance is close to three American football fields.
Danish researchers have indicated that a 20 MW wind energy conversion system (WECS) to provide power to up to 20,000 homes is feasible. The operational year is planned to be 2020.
Then, of course, there are ideas about using the Antarctic ("where average wind speeds can be very high") and tapping the jet stream with a ladder mill or rotor kite or turntable ("above"). Generating and controlling the force of a tornado? Why not, although this one might get closely scrutinized.
I've long felt that a design utilizing floating platforms placed between the major islands of Hawaii to support a group of WECS was the optimal future, for wind velocities are maximized in these regions and the flow is laminar. Mountains induce turbulence, thus causing problems for the gears, bearings and materials. These grazing plantships cannot be moored, so they would be tacked in a gyre pattern to return to the same spot every few days. Electricity cannot be wheeled, so hydrogen might well be generated for next generation airships.
-
Finding and using alternative energy sources is quickly becoming a must and one obstacle to overcome is how to make solar panels easier to incorporate into building projects. This, of course, involves making them look pretty. VTT Technical Centre of Finland has gone a step further in this. They have come up with a method that allows for the printing of decorative graphics and functional components onto flexible organic solar panels.
But that's not all. These panels can be used to harvest energy from interior lighting as well as sunlight, which yields enough energy to power small devices and sensors.
The process they developed involves production of organic solar panels using a roll-to-roll method, which can produce up to 100 meters of layered film per minute. According to the researchers, one rotary screen printing layer and two gravure printing layers on plastic substrate are used in the process. The process first involves functional layers being printed between plastic foils, while the final step is using barrier films to encapsulate them.
The organic solar panels produced in this way are only 0.2 mm thick and already include the electrodes and polymer layers used for light collection. The panels produced in this way can be placed on either interior surfaces or exterior ones, and they can also be attached to machines, gadgets and other devices. Due to the decorative prints that adorn them, these panels could easily become a tool used by interior designers.
To test their product, the researchers printed photovoltaic cells that are shaped like leaves. It takes two hundred of these decorative panels to make a square meter of an active solar panel surface. Such a panel was tested and found to be able to generate 3.2 amps of electricity with 10.4 watts of power.
Compare to traditional solar panels, organic ones are cheaper to produce, recyclable, require less material to make, and light enough so that they can be attached to a variety of surfaces. However, organic panels have a much lower efficiency than silicone-based panels. To try and raise the efficiency, the scientists are testing and researching roll-to-roll methods for making perovskite solar panels. They've made good progress, and the organic PV cells they produced are 5 times more efficient than organic photovoltaic cells produced by different means.
Related Articles on JetsonGreen.com:
Spray On Solar Cells
More Environmentally Friendly Solar Cells
Swiss Company Develops White Solar Cells
LEED Points
One recent workday when I had to drive to work instead of taking the bus, I found myself, not surprisingly, stuck in traffic. However, I had some great news to think over as I inched along - EHC's statewide game-changing victory at the PUC. This victory will create more energy efficiency education in more homes and help produce more green jobs for San Diego and California
Just before I turned off the engine of my Prius, I looked at the thermometer - winter is coming and the evenings are getting cooler. But I knew that once I got in the house it would be nice and warm. Nice and warm not from heating the house all day, but from all the energy upgrades we have done over the past two years. We put in new windows, and the white glove guys at ASI tested our house and figured how to make our house energy efficient. We got a new furnace and new heating ducts, and we got new insulation to keep our indoor temperature moderate.
We also got a nice check from SDG&E to help cover our costs. (Thanks to the ratepayers for that! You and I are funding SDG&E's rebate program - the funds don't come out of their profits or the goodness of their hearts. They are required to spend money to help people reduce energy use).
I walked to the front door thinking about our 37 SDGE bill that I had just opened-all smiles. And there, right in front of the door, was a box. I saw that SDG&E sent it. My first thought was to write "return to sender" on it and send it back, but curiosity got the better of me.
Inside were "eco friendly" gifts and a note thanking us for our energy upgrades. We got a ball cap and a t-shirt with the SDG light colored clothes reflect heat and make you cooler.
I looked at the tags and found out that the shirt was made in the Dominican Republic.
RULE NUMBER TWO: to reduce fuel consumption, don't buy clothes shipped long distances to reach you.
But there was more: plastic herb garden containers, a plastic lunch bag, and a plastic water bottle.
RULE NUMBER THREE IN BEING ENERGY EFFICIENT, don't buy things you don't need as it takes energy to make the product, energy to bring the product to you, and energy to bring the product to the landfill.
MEMO TO SDG&E:
We don't want more "stuff." Stuff creates greenhouse gases. Moving it around creates more. We also don't want three more fossil fueled power plants in our region. What we DO WANT from SDG&E is for them to move quickly toward a sane energy future, with policies and resources that put local, renewable energy sources ahead of fossil fuels. EHC's victory at the PUC in early November established groundwork for those improvements. No, we didn't suggest that t-shirts be a different color, or that they give out lunch-boxes instead of lunch-bags. We said that low-income families benefit more from one-on-one education vs. radio commercials to help save energy. We said that more middle-income families like mine need access to energy upgrade rebates. We said to expand green job training and get people back to work.
Beyond our recent victory, I'd like SDG&E to get out of the way of progress and let localities form their own nonprofit electric cooperatives that offer choices to residents about what kinds of energy solutions they want.
That would be the perfect gift to thank me for energy conservation.
