jeffreyhy

Ground-source heat pump systems do not use "geothermal resources". They use the constant temperature of the earth, once below the frost line, something like 50F?, to be a source or sink for heat. More efficient than ambient air because the air is hot when one wants to use it as a heat sink for AC and the air is cold when one wants to use it as a heat source for heating. Again, for a heat pump system the earth is not a source of energy. Please stop conflating ground-source heat pump systems with geo-thermal energy systems - they are two very different things. Regards, JEff

Steerpike

In my opinion, much of what is going on now is very much experimental, and is a necessary step to make advances for the future. So it may not be that 'environmentally efficient' today, but it could lead to advances and developments in the future that will provide the environmental justification.

That doesn't change my opinion that wind turbines are a visual blight on the landscape, and I wouldn't want them anywhere near where I live!

It occurred to me this week that there are thousands and thousands of uncovered parking lots in the Phoenix Metropolitan area that would benefit from being covered (due to the relentless sunshine), and these would be perfect venues for solar panels. The parking lots at ASU (Arizona State University) are already covered with solar panels (read about it here). I have no idea what the financial details are, but I pay extra for covered parking whenever it's available here, especially when it gets into the 90s or above! My own condo complex in AZ is a good example of a venue for solar panels - currently, we have covered parking (no garages) ... over 100 structures doing nothing but blocking the sun (see picture below - a rare shot of morning frost on the grass!) - may as well put solar panels on top of them!

scrubbedexpat099

If we are talking about wind, no. It is a mature technology.

Cold Fusion, well yes.

PV, there are tweaks and manufacturing improvements reducing costs.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterdet...rising-places/

I personally think the bigger issue is financing not technology, a mind set issue.

A 'net zero' school. Obviously easier to do with new build rather than a deep retrofit.

Steerpike

Surely there are improvements to be made, based on field deployment experience ... the gasoline engine is over 100 years old but the car I bought this year has an engine that is more efficient (significantly) than the one I bought 6 years ago - better gas mileage and higher power for the same size engine. It uses techniques to shut down certain cylinders when power demand is low, etc. I can't imagine there won't be improvements and innovations in the wind turbine world due to more 'field experience' and more vendors trying to make it in the space.

Further, costs will inevitably go down as more manufacturers get into the game, and volume production kicks in.

This image gives an idea of what I'm objecting to in terms of visual blight ... looks like a gorgeous foothill setting ruined by the turbines ...
.

Pulaski

I couldn't disagree more - nature complemented by abstract dynamic sculptures.

scrubbedexpat099

Aerofoils, well they have been around since Leornado at least, and an awful of of development has been done over the last 100 years.

Actually longer, how long have windmills been around?

So the amount of energy in any given area at any given wind speed is calculable, as is for that matter the maximum amount of solar energy falling an a surface. The issue is the price per KW, the solution for wind is larger towers and blades to get into cleaner air. But that has issues as your photograph demonstrates.

There are many obvious much easier solutions that reduce demand rather than increase supply.

The major problem in renewables is matching supply to demand unless some form of large scale storage becomes available. Wind is constant over the year, electric demand varies significantly. Hydroelectric schemes can pump water back up hill but are obviously inefficient.

As I mentioned one of the major issues regarding efficiency are the loses in distribution, obviously there have been significant advances in super conductors but not to the extent of use in large scale distribution.

Bob

The bigger issue isn't so much improvements to the tech of the mill, it's actual distribution of the power once harnessed and advances in that is a universal thing and better money spent where it's used most, so regular power stations, at the moment.

Solar, it's a economies of scale issue. It's much cheaper and environmentally friendly to do in Spain/Greece, where it's much more heavily used than it is here.

Using the mirror farms in the dessert would be a much more efficient approach to harnessing solar power in the US, with open spaces in Nevada, Arizona, Texas etc, but then the issue of distribution is the equaliser.

scrubbedexpat099

Spanish PV's were heavily dependent on very generous FIT's, which Spain can no longer afford.

WEBlue

This constant temperature of the earth (as opposed to the air temp above) is NOT a geo-thermal resource? That surprises me. I understand quite well how the geo-thermal heat pump works, since the husband & I've looked into buying one.

No conflating going on there, Jeff old chum, simply discussing two somewhat different heating systems in the same post (in response to another poster's comment). Sorry to confuse you, though. That wasn't intentional.

scrubbedexpat099

Geo thermal would usually refer to thermal positive sources, not constant temperatures.

WEBlue

Agreed, yet as a discussion topic on this thread, & to differentiate between wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources, I think referring to several different under-the-earth-sourced methods of heating by a loose umbrella designation of "geo-thermal" is fine, and is understood by many, laymen as well as professionals. Not being a professional in the field, myself, but merely someone looking to buy a house that will need heating....

scrubbedexpat099

In that context I would look at a house whose energy needs were so low that geo whatever would be gross overkill, problem solved.

Geo systems are usually not cheap to install and use Electricity, even if more efficiently than many other electricty based systems.

If you had access to a geo thermal source, say you drilled into 120F heat source, then the dynamics change.

Trixie_b

I haven't read this whole thread. In 2011 I was called to testify in londons high court on the noise levels from a small wind farm on a neighboring farm. The nose from the particular configuration on the specific topography was hideous and getting bumped awake from the noise seversl times a night was tantamount to sleep depravation. other ”noise” took the form of subsonic vibrations shaking arm hair like a
web, or itchy ears. Nasty.

scrubbedexpat099

Bad installation, wrong location, not high enough?

Trixie_b

Possibly all of that. The defendants settled before the technical witnesses
took the stand.