[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index

Re: FW: Tholar Energy Mythth/ Please thtand by....



(I know this seems to be getting off the list-topic, but I think it is somewhat interesting, especially since Judith will soon be posting a related Rosen message on solar and sustainable energy.)
 
Regarding using a photovoltaic system as a real-time off-the-grid system, I found this link to a company in Minnesota which sells such systems:
 
The cost of a standalone (no-grid) system which supplies 3000W and produces 2400kWh/yr is approximately $45,000-$48,000US.
 
How much of a "typical" house 2400kWh/yr will power is unclear to me. Recall that Pete mentioned that his annual usage was on the order of 28,000 kWh/yr. That usage requires over 10 times the output of the system mentioned above. At various websites, I have found "average" annual home usage numbers varying widely from 6,500-14,000 kWh. Even at the low end, that is still nearly three times the size of the system above.
 
The battery units for an off-grid home using 10,000kWh/yr would have to hold ~82kWh if it was to power the home for 3 days and nights of snow. If we assume that we will be careful and intentionally cut our usage in half during that time (because we saw the storm coming), then it will only have to hold ~41kWh. A single 62lb T-105 Trojan battery will supply 225Ah*6V=1.35kWh. (http://www.trojanbattery.com/TrojanPartNumber_2.asp) This means that approximately 31 of these batteries would be needed. However, it is bad to fully discharge those batteries, so we really would need something more like 40 batteries. (Also, these kinds of batteries can stand only a limited number of deep-discharges, less than a 1000, so it is harmful to their lifespan to use less batteries.)
 
Regards,
Tim
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: ROSEN Forum [mailto:***On Behalf Of Tim Gwinn
Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 8:32 PM
To: ***
Subject: Re: FW: Tholar Energy Mythth/ Please thtand by....

 ---snip--- 
 
 
Even though the corrected numbers are generally increased by a factor of 10, the results are still pretty low. If we go one more step and are pretty optimistic, and allow a conversion efficiency of 35% instead of 10%, the numbers change as follows:
2.45 kW-hours/m^2/day
447kWh/m^2/year (less than ideal weather)
1,526,058 BTU/yr
10.9 gal/yr of oil
101.7 lb/yr of coal
And, if we are looking at ultimate theoretical limits of photovoltaics, and allow a conversion efficiency of 85% instead of 10%, the numbers change as follows:
5.95 kW-hours/m^2/day
1086 kWh/m^2/year (less than ideal weather)
3,707,604 BTU/yr
26.7 gal/yr of oil
247.2 lb/yr of coal
 
The most severe limit to all these calculations is imposed by the weak amount of energy per sq-meter of sunlight hitting the earth, as Pete pointed out. I've seen numbers of 0.9 - 1.3 kW/m^2 maximum, so 1 kW/m^2 seems a reasonable value to begin with. Everything else seems to follow from that limit pretty straightforwardly.
 
I want to reiterate that this does not mean that photovoltaic systems are useless. It can act as a supplemental power source to a grid. But as a real-time technology to reliably replace connectivity to the grid for any significant length of time is pretty costly.
 
Besides an active tracking system for a large solar array (otherwise the conversion efficiency really suffers), the real difficulty, though, is how to reliably handle several snowy days in a row. I can't even imagine how many batteries would be required. I'll have to try to find some kWh numbers for storage batteries. 
 
Regards,
Tim