Energy Department Awards Contracts to Bring Cost of Solar Down

Energy secretary, Steven Chu, has been tirelessly working toward fulfilling President Obama’s priority of weaning America from dependence on fossil fuels. The success or failure of this effort depends heavily on America’s ability to bring the cost of solar energy in-line with the costs of electricity from fossil fuels. In his attempt to reach this goal, the Energy Department’s “SunShot” initiative has awarded $27 million to nine new solar projects.

Dr. Chu notes that solar companies have made strong progress in cutting the price of solar panels used in photovoltaic systems, but that this cut is not enough. The installed cost per watt is now about $4 and the panel is less than half of that, but if the panel became free, the rest of the system would still be far too expensive.

The department said it had spent $1 billion on solar in the last 10 years, and it took partial credit for the price of solar power falling 60 percent since 1995.

Future of Solar Power

5MW Project in Tennessee Will Use 761 Solar FlexRacks

Youngstown, Ohio – The most innovative product ever introduced for mounting photovoltaic solar panels has once again been selected for a new solar array project.

The Solar FlexRack was chosen for the West Tennessee Solar Farm, a 30-acre facility located along Interstate 40 in Haywood County. A total of 761 Solar FlexRacks will be used to mount 21,300 high-efficiency silicon-based modules. The project will supply 5MW of electrical power to 5,000 homes in the area.

The Solar FlexRack, a product of Nothern States Metals, is a pre-assembled Photo Voltaic module mounting system for ground or roof applications that can be installed by a 3-man crew in 3 minutes or less. This can realize a huge savings per project.

This system will be used in the 18MW solar farm in Piles Grove, New Jersey, a pair of Canadian projects, and all future installations by Apogee Solar of Connecticut.

 

Greg W reach me at arewegreenyet@gmail.com

Signature powered by WiseStamp 

Solar Charging Tree

photo: Yarel Yair – Design Studio

Love this idea. This is showing some real promise instead of all the talk. Let’s get this thing going.

I have seen similar fake trees in California (palm trees of course) used to provide power for cell phone towers. They actually look pretty good and they blend in reall well with the surroundings.

Hopefully we will see shapes like oak trees, fruit trees, redwoods (probably too big) but the list is almost endless. Much better looking than some ordinary ugly stone/plastic/steel monolith towers all over the city.

A couple of ideals:

1 - these trees could be charging stations for pedestrians to charge their cell phones, cameras, mp3 players, etc.

2 – solar powered vehicles should have solar film built into their skin so we are not forced to maintain coal powered electricity generating power plants.

Now, if only we could get more widespread access to good-looking, longer-distance vehicles.

Off the Grid: Portable Solar Chargers

Something we are constantly being reminded of on an almost daily basis is, we need to reduce our carbon footprint. The reasons are many and compelling. One of the largest contributing factors of that carbon footprint is power consumption in the form of electrical usage.

Electricity is not something anyone wants give up. And restructuring our habits to exclude something that has embedded itself so deeply into our everyday lives that we cannot imagine life without it is virtually impossible. We will always need and crave more electrical power. So, instead of continuing using traditional methods of generating electricity for our homes to recharge our portable electronic devices, let's take another step away from the grid with portable solar chargers.

By now most of should be at least familiar with the concept of capturing the sun's energy and converting it into usable electrical power. For those of you who don't, the basic idea is that a solar collector, also known as a photovoltaic solar panel, absorbs the sun's rays and converts it into electricity. They are becoming more and more prevalent on large buildings as well as homes. As usage of these solar panels become more and more common their price is coming down so that more of us can afford them.

Solar chargers come in all shapes and sizes from variously shaped plastic boxes to mats that simply roll-out when you need them. They are also lighter and more-compact than just a few years ago. These are great when you are in the back country camping or hiking. Portability is something everyone appreciate allowing you to carry them in your purse or backpack. Some are waterproof, they also vary in charge time and ability to work in less than sunny conditions. The very latest trend is to sew them into clothing, laptop cases, backpacks, and bike bags.

Right now you can purchase these thin-film devices online as well as from electronics stores for around $60 to $100. Or can choose to make your own.

Do It Yourself is becoming all the rage so why not jump in and try it yourself? Below are just a few sites I found to take you through the steps in making your own.

LifeHacker gives instructions on making a solar iPhone/iPad charger using an Altoids tin.


The website Popsci shows you how to make a solar charger.


If you are hanging onto rechargeable batteries, how about building your own solar battery charger.


And, if you are feeling really ambitious, how about a solar power generator?


Anything we can do to reduce our carbon footprint is a step in the right direction.

Tags: solar power,

Cheaper More Efficient Solar Tech

clipped from www.popsci.com The next frontier in traditional solar panels is concentrators - devices, usually lenses, that concentrate solar power onto the most expensive part of a solar panel - the silicon. Skyline Solar's "solar trough" design concentrates sunlight without using expensive lenses or complicated robotic armatures for tracking the sun as it crosses the sky. The entire system is built from commodity parts in an effort to make it cheap and scalable – the ultimate goal being 'grid parity,' or a system that is competitive with fossil fuels as a means of generating electricity. That's why the Department of Energy gave Skyline a $3 million grant as part of its Solar Energy Technologies Program. (Investors have plunked down another $25 million.)

Next evolutionary step in solar panels. Anything that increases efficiency and lowers costs is alright in my book.

These things will be everywhere within the next couple of years.

Plant Photosynthesis Leads to Cheap Storage of Solar Energy

The amount of sunlight that strikes the Earth in one hour supplies the entire planets energy needs for one year. Current technology to store excess carbon-free electricity during the day, to be used during heavily overcast days and at night, is too cost prohibitive and grossly inefficient to realize its full potential as a cheap, reliable, renewable energy source.

Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have devised a simple method that will overcome both the high cost and the inefficiency of current solar electrical storage. They can now mimic plant photosynthesis to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen and then recombine them inside a fuel cell, creating carbon-free electricity to power your house or your electric car, day or night.
(Photo credit: MIT/NSF; the new, efficient oxygen catalyst in action in Dan Nocera's laboratory at MIT.)

Daniel Nocera Matthew Kanan were inspired by plant photosynthesis to use a catalyst consisting of cobalt metal, phosphate and an electrode to produce oxygen gas from water, another catalyst produces hydrogen gas. Electricity, whether produced from a photovoltaic cell, a wind turbine or any other source, runs through the electrode resulting in oxygen gas. Another catalyst, using platinum, can produce hydrogen from water.

The new catalyst works at room temperature, in neutral pH water, and it's easy to set up, Nocera said. "That's why I know this is going to work. It's so easy to implement," he said.

Electrolyzers currently in use by industry are not suited to artificial photosynthesis because they are very expensive and require a highly basic (non-benign) environment that has little to do with the conditions under which photosynthesis operates.

This new discovery, along with solar panels as thin as paint for homes and cars, and with nano flakes revolutionizing the transformation of solar energy to electricity, will greatly reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and address global climate change. The biggest obstacle remaining is the government in legislating the switch-over from electricity-by-wire from a central source and big oil, who will not want to see the loss of income to their already abundantly over-flowing coffers. For individual home owners, the future is indeed looking brighter.


Further reading:
Home Windows Could Cut Carbon Emissions in Half

Cheap New Solar Panels

Nanosolar Powersheet That Could Change the World

Cheap, Green Solar Panels

California’s Workable Solution to Funding Solar?

Two California cities have come up with an innovative method that could incentivize the much needed move towards the use of solar panels. The solar loan law, sponsored by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys), will ‘allow’ cities and counties to make low-interest loans to homeowners and businesses to install solar panels, high-efficiency air conditioners and other improvements to save energy.

The best part of the package is that homeowners can pay back the loans as part of their property taxes. If they move, the improvements and loan balance are transferred to the next owner.

This plan reduces the upfront costs associated with solar panel installation and reduces the risk that the investment will be lost when people sell their homes.

Three thoughts come immediately to mind.

One-(on the positive side) the installation of solar panels will increase the resale value of homes, a much needed incentive for this crippled housing marketing, although it still won’t guarantee the homes sale.
Two-(on the potentially negative side) the wording of this bill is suspicious in that it uses the word ‘allow’. There are no guarantees that cities will actually loan money to property owners and there is no incentive for them to do so.
Third-(on the negative side) rebates of the cost of the systems are running about 25% and are declining due to several factors, one being homeowners are simply not taking advantages of them. So, unless the home owner is motivated by the possibility of reselling excess energy back to the power company, I don’t see this bill being of much use to anyone.

Palm Desert, a city with an aging population and high air-conditioning costs, already has a list of interested customers and has created the Palm Desert Energy Independence Program to offer the loans, setting a goal of reducing energy consumption by 30% over five years.

Berkeley has decided to support the loan program and has created “Berkeley FIRST”, but it is still in the planning stages.

Everyone is familiar with solar cells, they have been used for years, mainly on calculators, emergency road signs, parking lot lights, and even accent lights around your home. But it will probably take a major increase in the cost of power production similar to what is happening at the gas pump before people will get serious about adopting this cleaner power source.

Last year, Colorado State University discovered a method of manufacturing low-cost high-efficiency solar panels that will be ready for mass production by the end of 2008. Perhaps this will be the push needed to jump start the “solar revolution”.

Solar-Hydrogen House

This guy has the right idea on how to get off the grid, and is actually acting on it.

Mike Strizki, a civil engineer, living in East Amwell New Jersey, has discovered a method of making fuel out of sunlight and water. He generates enough electricity and hydrogen to heat and cool his home, and power his hydrogen-powered and electric-powered cars.

Imagine never having to stop at a gas station again, or paying a utility bill. Or being able to power your house from your car.

More details here.

He offers a great alternative to batteries for storing electricity by using hydrogen.

It might take a few years to make the cost of this system affordable, but it shows great promise for a new hydrogen-electric economy, one that eliminates or sharply reduces the greenhouse gas emissions causing climate change.

This is the type of ingenuity we need to get us away from fossil fuels and pollution.

You say you want a Revolution

Let’s clean up our land, Let’s clean up our air, Let’s clean up our water. Very lofty goals. Everyone should be involved. But what is it going to cost? Let’s face it, cost is the only factor that either prohibits us or causes us to do anything.

According to a report by the Paris-based International Energy Agency, the cost will be approximately $45 trillion over the next several decades.

This is the price tag placed on the necessary "energy revolution" that will be needed to greatly reduce the world's dependence on fossil fuels while maintaining steady economic growth. More from the report: the world needs to build 1,400 nuclear power plants and vastly expand wind power, in order to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050.

Now that we have a bottom line figure and a game plan we can get started, right?

Trying to get the world’s population to agree on what is necessary is not feasible. “We require immediate policy action and technological transition on an unprecedented scale," IEA Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka said.

A U.N.-network of scientists concluded last year that emissions have to be cut by at least half by 2050 to avoid an increase in world temperatures of between 3.6 and 4.2 degrees above pre-18th century levels. This is assuming that greenhouse gases (and therefore mankind) is the main causal factor of global warming. Other scientists say the increase in global temperature is a natural phenomena and cannot be avoided.

Even if the climate change is a natural occurrence, not induced by mankind, we will all benefit from participating in a revolution of such a grand scale.

We have the technology in place right now to lessen our dependence on fossil fuel. Solar technology, wind technology and even nuclear technology, all, if allowed to be put into place, will greatly help alleviate our dependence on fossil fuel which would result in drastic decreases in greenhouse gas emissions..

Why aren’t we using them? Why are we stubbornly holding on to old ways of heating and cooling our homes? Money.

It is expensive to convert our traditional methods of heating and air conditioning to less eco-damaging methods.

Even if every government on this planet would miraculously agree on a method of such a large transition, coming to a decision on who would bear the cost would require a revolution in thinking. This financial investment is more than three times the current size of the entire U.S. economy, 1.1% of the world’s gross domestic product.

"Carbon capture and storage" technology, allowing coal-powered power plants to catch emissions and inject them underground, is needed now. This would only be an initial first phase. This plan can easily be seen as necessary in order to prevent future contamination of our atmosphere while developing technology to prevent contamination in the first place. Sort of like stopping the leak in the bucket until we build a better bucket.

That better bucket will need to come in the form of solar, wind and nuclear power plants. The world would have to construct 32 new nuclear power plants each year, and wind-power turbines would have to be increased by 17,000 units annually. Nations would have to achieve an eight-fold reduction in carbon intensity — the amount of carbon needed to produce a unit of energy — in the transport sector.

This is a huge undertaking. We can’t get politicians to agree on how to best spend our tax dollars to benefit tax payers with what is left over after they distribute their windfall to special interest groups, how are we ever going to get them to think about cleaning up the environment? If we follow the established method of relying on politicians to pay for this revolution, this price tag is going to be much greater than $45 trillion.

I think we can all agree that we are on a dangerous course regardless of what is causing global warming. Our whole ideology on how we use energy to support our lifestyles needs to be re-examined. Kate of Hills and Plains Seedsavers directed my attention to a wonderful animation that so marvelously portrays mankind’s existence that I just have to share it here. It is entitled Carbon Weevils.

Our current lifestyles are not sustainable enough to promote the healthy life we all want. Greenhouse gases are a major contributing factor to rising hospital visits which in turn increases health costs and reduces quality of life. Rising demand for fossil fuel increases the price of that fossil fuel. The increasing number of food recalls is testament that mankind cannot maintain a safe food supply due to the sheer number of people to be fed. The number of starving people is rising due in part to converting food crops into fuel crops. Even though the world produces enough food to feed everyone, if it isn’t profitable to do so we won’t. Corporations will only participate if it is in their best financial interest.

We simply cannot continue on this path. Getting the world to act together in the best interest of each and every one of us will indeed require a revolution.

Building for energy efficiency

The 10^th Biennial Conference on Business and the Environment was held in Vancouver, British Columbia this past week involving Canada, the U.S. and Mexico concerning the construction of residential and commercial buildings.

A report issued by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation at that conference stated that “green” construction could cut North America’s climate-warming emissions faster and more cheaply than any other environmental measure.

Traditional building techniques have resulted in North America’s buildings releasing more than 2,200 megatons per year. This represents 35% of the continents total greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. If the construction industry would take advantage of currently available and emerging energy-saving technologies this figure would be reduced by 1,700 megaton emissions in 2030! A cut of this size would nearly equal the CO2 emitted by the entire U.S. transportation sector in 2000.

Taking into account the life-expectancy of a building, residential or commercial, we would be taking a huge step toward preventing a very large chunk of future greenhouse gas emissions.

We already know it works. Newly built green buildings routinely reduce energy usage by 30-50% over conventional buildings, so these figures are not just ‘blue-sky’ theory. The most efficient buildings perform more than 70% better than conventional properties.

Municipalities around the world are getting the message and taking steps to ease the transition toward a more responsible habitation with our environment.

European Union leaders have agreed to commit to legislation setting firm targets for a 20% reduction on CO2 emissions before 2020. They have also agreed to reduce energy imports, liberalize internal energy markets to increase competition, reduce taxes on environmentally friendly products, and to achieve world leadership in renewable energy technologies.

Kate from Hills and Plains Seedsavers informed me recently that her home town of Adelaide in South Australia, has passed an ordinance that requires all new construction have rain water collection systems built into the home. Yeah! Great Idea! How about going a bit further and requiring all new buildings, residential as well as commercials have solar power panels installed. A good point she brought up would be to have money collected on your electricity bill go towards having them installed on every existing and new homes.

Back in the U.S., ten states have been identified as the best for solar power, but its not based solely on number of sunny days. The criteria for getting on this list is rebate programs, loans, tax exemptions, regulatory policies, and strong support for setting renewable energy usage targets.

A number of cities around the country, including San Francisco, Boston, Seattle and Scottsdale, Arizona, are leading the way with laws that require new public buildings to be green. So far, 54 cities and 23 federal agencies have adopted LEED standards for buildings, says Bill Browning, senior fellow for Rocky Mountain Institute and co-author of Green Development: Integrating Ecology and Real Estate. An industry has blossomed around the concept. At least 12,000 people, a record, attended the GreenBuild International Conference and Expo in Denver last November.

Clean Energy States Alliance tells us that more states are turning toward solar thermal heat and hot water heating, because of their efficiency and affordability, as well as their stable technology, and focusing on affordable housing to expand the market for solar.

The marketplace is always ready to supply us with what we need.

There are several companies that are currently making roofing shingles out of solar panel material. This one comes from OkSolar. Another step in the right direction.

Open Energy Corp has innovated the use of solar panels by embedding its “SolarSave” panels onto 4-foot-long plates that roofers can attach to wood, without needing an electrician which in turns can minimize labor costs.

Why aren’t we mandating these types of forward thinking improvements into new construction? Just adding better insulation and sealing cracks around windows and doors isn’t cutting it anymore. Consumers are a pretty savvy bunch. We know these products are out there. We know prices are coming down because of the proliferation of the technology. We also know that by changing the way in which buildings are currently being constructed we can save not only future money in lowered HVAC bills but cut down on the amount of carbon dioxide our buildings put into our atmosphere.

So what’s the hold up?

Green construction often adds less than one percent to the cost of a conventional building, but the payoffs can include energy costs cut by one-third.

Residential builders are slow to catch on to the trend, as they tend to look at what sold yesterday when deciding what to build today. Homebuilders mostly use the same means, methods and materials used 30 years ago. Architects and designers are rarely employed for homebuilding, and most would eagerly jump at the chance to design an energy efficient building. Small companies build most houses and they can’t afford architects, so it’ll take a while for the green trend to filter down.

This is a radical change to traditional building practices so naturally resistance is to be expected. People want energy efficiency but are not willing to pay for customized homes. What we need are a few brave small building companies to build these ‘customized’ homes in hopes that they will become the norm. This will lead the way to more companies selling this type of home and before too long everyone will be building them.

Another problem is the trend towards over-sized houses some of them outfitted with a full-body shower spraying more than 20 gallons of water per minute—enough to fill an entire bathtub in one minute. This type of extravagance should be taxed heavily to make the purchase of them less attractive, in my opinion. “Every three people putting in these shower systems negates the efforts of 100 people putting in efficient products,” wrote Alex Wilson, president of Vermont-based BuildingGreen, executive editor of Environmental Building News and author of Your Green Home. Federal regulations require low-flow, 2.5-gallon-a-minute showerheads. Yet these new multiple-head systems spray 10 times as much or more, “a small portion of which may briefly contact your body,” Wilson wrote, “en route from your water heater to your sewer line.”

“You can build a pretty mediocre house from an energy standpoint at 1,200 square feet and it will probably use a lot less energy than a state-of-art green home that is 3,500 square feet. And that’s a factor we need to be conscious of,” Wilson says.

Okay, so it’s clear that the green building movement is growing and it’s equally clear that not everybody cares about the environment, but those of us who do should be able to do something about it without it financially ruining us. Obstacles remain but it is vital to our health as well as the health of the planet that we not be discouraged. Toronto-based designer Bruce Mau, keynote speaker at the Building Energy ‘05 conference in Boston said “Now that modern technology has put us in a position that we can do anything, what will we do?”

I’m dreaming of alternative energy

I’m dreaming of a future with alternative energy. Residences with wind and solar devices that provide all of their energy needs. Vast fields of switchgrass and other crops grown for ethanol production that effectively cut our dependence on foreign oil.

Decreased destruction to our environment due to decreased need to search for more oil in our national parks and reserves.

OPEC shrinking in world importance because of a lesser demand for their natural resources. Wars becoming a less viable option because we don’t need to covet our neighbors oil resources.

Maybe this is only a dream but there is no denying it is one worth struggling for. And we can make it happen. If only we were motivated enough to commit to it. Our lack of motivation to implement alternative energy policies has become very costly.

For instance, in our rush to secure continued access to global oil reserves we are spending billions on the military to that end. Money that would be better spent for research of alternative energy sources. While we are playing this hand, other countries, such as France and Germany, have already developed alternative energy policies and have decreased their dependence on oil rich countries. This is turn increases the cost of oil to America, because of the rule of supply and demand. OPEC wants to keep their revenue stream fat and if other countries don’t buy from them then the countries that do have to take up the slack, meaning higher cost to us.

The cost of a barrel of oil is far higher than OPEC’s asking price. The true cost is in its kilowatt/hour ratio. Billions are spent each year in securing of oil, in searching for oil, in the mobilization of our military to assure its continued flow to the U.S. The value of American soldiers lives has no price tag but must be included in the cost of our dependence on oil to squander on oversized SUV’s and transportation of products that consumers can live without.

The U.S. has the a more highly evolved, technologically advanced military than anyone else but we are being left behind in the race toward technological developments of more efficient renewable energy systems. This, to me, is a gravely missed opportunity that will eventually cost us dearly.

Alternative energy will greatly reduce our dependence on the natural resources of other countries. This alone would do more to ease political tensions than any diplomat could ever hope for. It will also reduce the need for such a large military.

To believe in the need for reduced greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprints to have a healthier existence is a no-brainer. Yet we are convinced that the cost of alternative energy is too prohibitive. How do these costs compare to the number of deaths from smog-related heart attacks and lung cancer, asthma suffering, costs to clean the air we breathe, costs to clean up the huge stretches of shoreline every time a monstrous oil tanker breaks apart, cost to the environment from searching for a few barrels of oil in places like the Alaska wildlife reserve and Colorado’s national parks or the continued removal of coal by strip-mining the West Virginia landscape. The loss of lives and the continued destruction of pristine and beautiful places such as these is unforgivable when we have valid alternatives.

To make the change from what we have always done to a healthier and less expensive existence takes a leap of faith.

It is human nature to take the easy approach to what we do. Right now it is easier to just plug into the grid because it is already there. We only seem to be motivated to implement an alternative when what we have is taken away from us. Forward thinking people see that we will someday be without fossil fuels, someday our ability to create electricity from water will have diminished due to the increasing demand of an ever increasing population.

We are a part of this ecological system, we do not have to be a slave to it.

The state of California and Texas have incorporated wind energy into their energy programs. Other states such as Massachusetts have been stymied by Senators like Ted Kennedy, who claims wind turbines are great but are unsightly and a threat to birds. This idiotic statement illustrates our greatest problem with moving forward with alternative energy. We need to get people like this and others who are in big oils pockets, out of congress and replace them with people of foresight, people who place the threat against our soldiers lives and the environment above the threat to a few birds.

Replacing ‘old school’ politicians is only part of it. Consumers need to do their part by demanding the market supply alternative energy appliances.

Companies are developing small residential wind turbines and cheap portable solar panels.

Akeena Solar signs manufacturing partnership with Kyocera

Stormblade: the first truly quiet residential wind turbine

Residential solar kits are available

Governments are beginning to respond as well.

South Australia, through new solar feed-in laws, will pay householders and small energy consumers using solar panels twice the value of electricity they put into the electricity grid.

Arizona lawmakers are pushing legislation to create tax breaks for solar energy providers and to attract solar energy use for homeowners.

Maybe my dream for alternative energy isn’t very far off after all.

Island runs on renewable energy

Imagine living in a community where all of your electrical power needs are furnished by wind, water and sun. This sounds like an environmentalists dream.

The people of the Isle of Eigg Scotland have decided to make this dream a reality. They have embraced the renewable energy promise and have adopted a 24 hour dependence on sun, water and wind to provide all of their energy needs. I applaud their faith and look forward to tracking their attempt to prove, or disprove, the premise that we can live in comfort without fossil fuels to provide heating, air conditioning, lighting, cooking, etc.

Many communities talk about lessening their carbon footprint but this small community, of just under 100, actually put the idea into play. On Feb 1, 2008, their tiny island, 9k (5.6 miles) long and 5k (3.7 miles) wide, began the great experiment to see if renewable energy can be accommodated within distribution networks.

In the past, the people of Eigg had only limited access to electricity depending entirely on black-smoke-belching, unreliable diesel generators. These old generators have been updated and will now be relegated to the role of backup in case of emergency. It seems they cannot completely remove themselves from the oil companies umbilical cord just yet.

Their power grid now incorporates a 9.9 kWp Photo Voltaic system, three hydro generation systems (totaling 112 kW) and a 24 kW wind farm of five wind turbines that will utilize a bank of batteries to guarantee continuous availability of electrical power. Power is distributed to the island's 45 households, 20 businesses and six community buildings via a 6-mile long buried cable. A load management system has been installed to optimally distribute the energy captured.

The battery system
The systems' twelve battery inverters are the heart of the system and control the system voltage and frequency, and manage the balance between loads and generation by controlling the power into and out of the batteries. Additional system control will be provided by load management at times of high renewable generation.

The inverters make up four clusters, each consisting of 24 batteries with a total energy storage capacity of 212kWh.

Solar Panel array
This array will be at its highest value during summer month when hydro generation and wind turbines are expected to be at their lowest output phases. This is where the diesel generators are most likely to be needed to provide continuous electrical power.

The array consists of 60 modules connecting the network via grid-connect inverters which will allow the PV output to feed the island loads directly. Surplus output is stored in the batteries.

Wind turbines
Four turbines on 15m towers each connected to inverters are sited at the Southern end of the island where the best wind exposure is obtained.







It is estimated that this complete system will save 10 tons of CO2 per year. Note: I have not found any information on how much CO2 this island created previously but I am certain that this 10 ton figure is based on what the island would have created had it been electrically powered 24/7 by those old diesel generators, which it had not.

But the success of this test will go a long way to providing much needed encouragement for other off-grid communities to adopt these cleaner, more sustainable resources for their electrical power, as well as provide proof that renewable energy can be incorporated into existing networks to help achieve co2 reduction targets.

The island made history once before when it became the first successful community buy-out. In 1997, after decades of mismanagement by absentee landlords, the island was bought by the Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust, a partnership between the residents of Eigg, the Highland Council, and the Scottish Wildlife Trust. Visit www.isleofeigg.org for more information.

I am interested in learning how far the people of Eigg are willing to take their commitment to a more sustainable, greener lifestyle. Do they recycle? Do they grow their own food? What do they do with their garbage?

If anyone knows the answers to these questions I would like to hear from you. I will do some research to see what I can learn and post it here.

Now, go out and green your world.

Kite powered generator

Here is a unique wind-harnessing device to generate electricity.

Kites, as we all know from our kite flying days, can catch a lot of wind. The traditional propeller slices through the wind and is therefore not as efficient at using the wind to generate power. The kite ‘string’, actually metal poles, pumps arms extending from an alternator that creates electricity. Cables attached between the metal poles and the alternators arms allow the kites to adjust height and angle for maximum wind resistance.

The concept is similar to wave power units that uses ocean currents to ‘pump’ an electricity generating alternator.

This idea, in conjunction with solar power, is a very viable method of generating electrical power.

For more information see webite.

Solar power advertising signs

Personally, I think lighting up advertising signs is a colossal waste of electricity. The amount of power these signs collectively use is astounding. We need to solarize these power hogs to get them off of our power grid.

The costs to power these signs, of course, gets passed onto the consumer, so it would be nice not to have this expense come out of our pockets. Plus, the savings in pollution generated in created the extra power to run these signs would be astounding as well.

Electricity should be generated for our safety and personal use, i.e., traffic lights, street lights, home lighting, etc.

I have always thought advertising to be an eyesore and distraction on our roadways and with the amount of advertising we get on television, radio, all manner of public areas, and in the mail, why do we have to be subjected to this onslaught on our roadways too?

I briefly mentioned in a previous post the rolling blackouts this country is subjected to, if the power companies did not have to provide electricity for this type of superfluous advertising activity, we could stand a better chance of having those blackouts become a thing of the past. Plus, if these signs are on solar power then they would provide some light during those blackouts.

With the art of attracting people to shopping malls and individual businesses using solar power we could all benefit from the savings in more ways than one.

A company based in Spain called Grayhatch, has come up with an innovative and eco friendly creation that takes on the power hungry advertising market. Their inventors have devised a low-energy “bio-luminescent material” that is powered by solar panels. These panels allow for the replacement of wasteful light-bulbs in the advertising panels above the bench, which also gives customers a pretty comfy spot to sit. The benches are made of recycled plastic bags that, Grayhatch claims, leaves a zero carbon footprint and could each save 200 tons of pollution from entering into the atmosphere every year.


As a side note, in the future, these benches could provide a recharging kiosk for personal electronic devices such as cell phones, iPods, etc. Just an idea.

Currently, there is an order for 3,000 of these benches to be installed in the UK and other countries.

Solar trees

Here’s an innovative way to light up our streets and save money doing it. These solar trees, tested for four weeks in October in Vienna, Austria, provided enough light during the night-time even when the sun did not show for as much as four days in a row. Even in the gloom of our U.S. winters, there are a lot of cities that get enough sunlight to keep these lights charged.

Without having to install expensive underground wiring they save in installation costs as well as remaining portable enough to move around to where they would be needed most and they are immune to blackouts.

Of course, saving money only comes in the long run. But with the level of city expansion the U.S. goes through every year there is an abundance of opportunites to use this type of light instead of the more costly traditional street lighting. If only bureaucratic red tape could be cut to allow a new technology.

Designed by Ross Lovegrove, the lights have 10 solar panels arrayed at the top of tree-like branches, which charge built-in batteries. The batteries then power LEDs for illumination. Compared to conventional streetlights, they emit much less light pollution, because LEDs generate a very directed light. The trees also incorporate light detectors! So the lights automatically turn on at sunset and off at sunrise. Now that is smart use of technology.

Using this type of technology, cities could put LED light systems on city buildings as well as at bus stops, airport terminals, etc to cut down on carbon emissions and slash local electrical bills.

Street lighting consumed 10 percent of all the electricity used in Europe in 2006 or 2,000 billion KWh, and resulted in carbon emissions of 2,900 million ton.

The use of more energy-efficient lighting in the Austrian city of Graz, with a population of almost 300,000 saved the city 524,000 KWh of electricity and 67,200 euros [US $96,800] in 2005.