# Wind farms



## uphillklimber (Nov 20, 2015)

x


----------



## Puck it (Nov 20, 2015)

A European company I think Danish has proposed putting a wind farm south Martha's Vineyard farther out to sea than the failed Cape Wind project.  The cost of power for these offshore turbine is quite a bit higher than on land turbines.  It baffles me at times.


----------



## ss20 (Nov 20, 2015)

Uhhhhhhh...


----------



## drjeff (Nov 20, 2015)

I've never once thought that wind or solar were on par with other means of power generation both in terms of cost per kw hour to generate and also typically with the size of the footprint needed to scale these types of facilities up to anywhere near the size they'd have to be to generate what a typical oil/gas/coal fired plant generates, let alone what a nuclear plant generate.

What gets me, bar none, is when the environmental lobby does what it can to shut down/prevent development of a coal/oil/gas powered power generation facility because of environmental concerns and then will often follow up with a NIMBY line of attack to prevent what they claim is a better power generation alternative (usually wind or solar), let alone the claims that they (the environmental lobby) often makes that wind or solar is close to as cost effective to generate or produce as oil/gas/coal.  It can't be both ways with current capabilities!!

Heck I have a microcosm of this basic scenario literally playing out right now less than a 1/2 mile from where I'm typing this at my office.  A developer who is refurbishing an old textile mile wants to put in a small hydro electric power generation facility using modifications to an existing old sluiceway that is in the textile mill.  People were saying that it would be a clean, efficient way to generate power (which hydro sure can be), now some of these same people who were for the hydro plant have found out that in times of lower water flow, along the damn floodgate controlled section of the river near my office, that there will be some limited times that the water flow through the new hydro plant will prevent water from flowing over the adjacent scenic water fall that is one of the most recognized landmarks in the center of the old mill town my office is located in.  Suddenly there are lots of people who were for this project a week ago that are now against once the report of times with no water going over the waterfall came out this past Tuesday!!! 

There are pros and cons to pretty much everything!!  Some people sure don't seem to get that!!


----------



## prsboogie (Nov 20, 2015)

Thanks for sharing, admittedly this is a long post an very fact filled. I personally think everyone can do more to reduce  our dependency on fossils but think we really should be using more nuclear and better burning fossil plants in addition to renewables. But there is a huge push from our government and environmentalists for wind and solar advancement at the cost of those who don't have the political voice to oppose it. Thus the term NIMBY - not in my back yard, But in the back yards of those who can't say no.


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

I wonder if wind farms are going to create genetically modified wind..?  

Im against that shti...


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Nov 20, 2015)

Uphillklmber, as a self described tree hugger I greatly commend you on that post.

I am one of the people who is typicaly acused of wanting to "destroy the planet"  and such by enviromentalists for being against most forms of "green" energy. But the truth is that I and most people who are against "green energy" are all for true green energy. The problem is basically exactly what you posted. "Green energy" is not that green. 
-Huge pieces of land must be cleared to install the systems. 
-They do not produce as much power as other options. 
-They are not as dependable as other options.
-They do not last as long as other options.

I have spoken to many people who have installed solar systemsnon their homes. None of them would have done it with out tax credits from the government to help cover the cost. What does that tell you about the true efficiency of it? Its just not worth it, unless you can get others to pay for it.

I am all for making the world a better and cleaner place for me, and future generations. I just want it to be truly better, not just "warm and fuzzy fealings" better because we can say we put up a windmill, but that turned out to just cost a ton of $ and not really do anything....


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

I want to convert to solar - I can get assistance - mainly because the power goes out here and it pisses me off..  
But also I'd like to become self powered at my house.

I've been to Germany a lot..  Seems like every house has solar systems..
And anyone I work with there likes it enough.  They can work out of their houses and stuff with no problem..

I have a buddy thats doing huge solar implementations all over the country..
He's stoked..


----------



## prsboogie (Nov 20, 2015)

The only way I'd go solar is if there was no cost to me, lease with a reduction in my electric bill and no out of pocket expenses .

Once they find an affordable way of storing the electric produced for night use that is efficient that will be a different story


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

I don't mind paying part of it..


----------



## steamboat1 (Nov 20, 2015)

Puck it said:


> A European company I think Danish has proposed putting a wind farm south Martha's Vineyard farther out to sea than the failed Cape Wind project.  The cost of power for these offshore turbine is quite a bit higher than on land turbines.  It baffles me at times.


Actually it's just 3 miles SE of Block Island. Construction began in July. They hope to have it online by the end of 2016.


----------



## steamboat1 (Nov 20, 2015)

And who's paying for it? Why the good people of RI.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/08/18/rhode-island-wind-farm-opponents-head-to-court.htm

*Rhode Island Wind Farm Opponents Head to Court*


             By MARIMER MATOS 

ShareThis


                               PROVIDENCE (CN) - *The  first off-shore wind farm in the United States will have Rhode Islanders  footing the bill at $497 million above market cost, taxpayers claim in  Federal Court.*
     The Aug. 14 lawsuit comes less than a month after  Deepwater Wind touted the installation of its first foundation  component for the Block Island Wind Farm.
     With construction "now  imminent," plaintiffs Benjamin Riggs and Laurence Ehrhardt say a  federal judge must enjoin Deepwater's power-purchase agreement with  Narragansett Electric Co., more commonly known as National Grid.
*The  agreement, which the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission approved  on Aug. 16, 2010, requires electricity consumers to front the cost  National Grid's purchase by paying 3.5 percent more per year for  electricity for up to 20 years, according to the complaint.*
     Riggs  and Ehrhardt filed the complaint along with the Rhode Island  Manufacturers Association, a trade group that lobbies to keep costs down  for local businesses.
     Claiming that the deal advances  "parochial state polices and undermine federal policies," the 27-page  complaint says that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has  "exclusive jurisdiction to regulate wholesale electricity transactions  in interstate commerce."
     The wind farm's opponents say that the  illegal power-purchase agreement "allows Deepwater Wind to receive a  fixed price for the energy, regardless of the prices established in the  FERC-approved wholesale markets."
     Ultimately, the agreement  "contravenes and stands as an obstacle to FERC's regulatory policy  choices," the complaint states.
     William Harsch, an attorney for the plaintiffs based in a Warwick, R.I., has not returned a request for comment.


----------



## prsboogie (Nov 20, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> I don't mind paying part of it..



I would do part I guess if I was building new or they ( the solar companies ) could eliminate my electric bill completely, that would be different.


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 20, 2015)

Wind Farms to me don't seem all that ugly , although I would not want to be home or (Down wind ) not long after an ice storm .

Tax Credits are expiring 2016, well see what happens with the double edge sword of cheap Natural Gas. It's going to make Solar a tuff sell. 
Local permitting is getting more expensive with Municipalities requiring engineering reports on roof structures, adding more to the cost.

Not sure up North how difficult it is to keep the snow off Solar PV systems ? The evacuated tube systems (hydronic)do a good job of shedding snow . They are also very expensive and most are made in China 

If you don't have access to Natural gas Geo systems are next best thing but the cost makes it prohibitive payback is long ,even longer now given alternatives. If your planning to stay in a home for a long time its worth it or have a pond or spring , wells are a huge part of installation cost.   Had a customer wanted a Geo 3yrs ago but he lived in a "Water Shed Aquafer Area" The permit application and restrictions made it clear they didn't want Geo's in that area. The engineer who wrote the guidelines was not up to speed on system design ...very frustrating . There are different types of antifreeze used and they had issues with Methanol vs Glycol . Glycol being less efficient but would remain in the ground and not evaporate like Methanol in weak concentration that would not pose a health hazard.
Ended up installing a Heat pump system.

Lots of choices and most depend on circumstances . But if you looking  for clean Natural gas I think is the way to go. Made in USA!


----------



## mbedle (Nov 20, 2015)

Interesting you mention heat pumps - with the new variable speed compressors, they are becoming very efficient and close to what geothermal is at.


----------



## wtcobb (Nov 20, 2015)

Incredibly long but incredibly detailed post involving energy trends and usage:
http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/how-tesla-will-change-your-life.html

Main focus is Tesla and the electric car industry (spearheaded by Tesla), but this article traces the roots of the auto industry and energy consumption.


----------



## dlague (Nov 20, 2015)

I was curious about how wind turbines are viewed.  So I googled it!  Actually I used bing but binged does not work.  I was surprised about environmentalists being against wind energy.  Some of the issues they mentioned were view-shed, bat/bird kills, noise or health issues and with the poor performance and high cost of industrial wind and the fact that it could never replace current fossil fuel generators, they feel like the value is not there.

The fact is wind is not a constant, sun is not a constant, however, fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydro generators are so they are not going away anytime soon.  With all of the wind and solar power capacity in the US no fossil fuel generators has been shut down.  I work for an electric distributor and we attempted to build a 6 acre community solar farm and the cost of doing so was crazy.  Basically, members would prepay a 20 yr lease for a "Panel" (not really) and they would get a KWH or $ credit on their bill.  The problem, pay back was going to be about 16 years.  Nights and cloudy days, it did little to nothing.  Also, people did not want to see the solar farm so we were going to build it over a swamp in the woods.  In the end, there was not enough buy in and the project was canceled.

In New England they are always trying to find ways to lower the cost of power generation either through Northern Pass for cheap Hydro Power or building natural gas lines into southern NH and northern MA.  Both are heavily opposed.  Then again many are opposed to wind turbines as well and they also do not want to see solar fields.  What are we to do?

Interesting facts - you can see we barely put a dent in the total electricity consumption in the US but the government spent over 10 billion in subsidies.



> In the twelve months through August 2015, utility scale solar power generated 24.6 terawatt-hours (TWh), 0.60% of total U.S. electricity. In fiscal year 2013, federal supports and subsidies for solar power amounted to $4.393 billion, over 27% of all federal supports and subsidies for electricity production. This figure does not include state and local spending.
> 
> For calendar year 2014, the electricity produced from wind power in the United States amounted to 181.79 terawatt-hours, or 4.44% of all generated electrical energy. For fiscal year 2013, wind power in the United States received $5.936 billion in federal subsidies and supports, or 37% of all subsidies and supports for electricity production. This figure does not include state and local spending.


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 20, 2015)

mbedle said:


> Interesting you mention heat pumps - with the new variable speed compressors, they are becoming very efficient and close to what geothermal is at.



Efficiencies are great even at low ambient temps but capacity loss is where they need backup help.
The multi zone minisplit units are awsome . Conventional heart pumps unless zoned (expensive) heat and cool whole house and loose some efficiency moving air. You can mix and match small ducted or wall units and just contol the space your in .

I like to think of it as recycling everyone elses waste heat .


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Nov 20, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Efficiencies are great even at low ambient temps but capacity loss is where they need backup help.
> The multi zone minisplit units are awsome . Conventional heart pumps unless zoned (expensive) heat and cool whole house and loose some efficiency moving air. You can mix and match small ducted or wall units and just contol the space your in .
> 
> I like to think of it as recycling everyone elses waste heat .



My friend removed his iil furnace and installed a heat pump to heat and cool his house a few years ago. It works great as long as the temps stay above 20. Below that, and it will not heat the house above 50 or so. He mainly uses his pellet stove for heat now, othrrwise he freezes. His is a multizone system I think Fujitsu brand.


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

prsboogie said:


> I would do part I guess if I was building new or they ( the solar companies ) could eliminate my electric bill completely, that would be different.



Based upon my exposure to the sun - I could cover my entire electric cost and send some to the grid..


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 20, 2015)

Hawkshot99 said:


> My friend removed his iil furnace and installed a heat pump to heat and cool his house a few years ago. It works great as long as the temps stay above 20. Below that, and it will not heat the house above 50 or so. He mainly uses his pellet stove for heat now, othrrwise he freezes. His is a multizone system I think Fujitsu brand.



LOL Someone didn't do their Math , 
2 years  ago my Mechanic used his woodstove and shut off his heatpump . When he turned it on was unaware of the ice . It literally self distrusted because of an out of balance fan . 
Heat pumps can be combined with gas or oil furnaces 

Fujitsu's are a good choice


----------



## prsboogie (Nov 20, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> Based upon my exposure to the sun - I could cover my entire electric cost and send some to the grid..



I imagine in the summer i might, the winter, no way.


----------



## dlague (Nov 20, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> Based upon my exposure to the sun - I could cover my entire electric cost and send some to the grid..



10 Solar Panel System = about 4 KWH  that is with solid sun exposure for 5-6 hours,  clouds reduce that production. 1 200 watt panel  56 x 39.1 x 1.6 inches ; 36 pounds approximate


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

prsboogie said:


> I imagine in the summer i might, the winter, no way.



I heat with oil..

Large roof - no trees blocking - southern exposure..
I've been decreasing my electricity usage as well by doing certain things...

I have some ideas on how to lower it more.

i think I can pull this off...


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 20, 2015)

If you have the right set up, I say go for it. I've got a couple of friends with zero regrets on going solar.  

Hopefully the tax credits get extended beyond 2016.


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 20, 2015)

If there was a inexpensive way to store Solar energy ? The Billion dollar question .


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> If you have the right set up, I say go for it. I've got a couple of friends with zero regrets on going solar.
> 
> Hopefully the tax credits get extended beyond 2016.



Same..  
Germany has so many houses converted.. And it's not really that sunny there..


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 20, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> If there was a inexpensive way to store Solar energy ? The Billion dollar question .



Tesla Powerwall seems like it's going in the right direction..


----------



## prsboogie (Nov 20, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> If there was a inexpensive way to store Solar energy ? The Billion dollar question .



I had seen an episode of this NEW House couple years ago and there were students at M.I.T. at the time working on a system to store energy from solar in 55gal poly drums filled with plain H2O. They had a converter which they switched in the evening to change from charge to discharge. They estimated the system they had to cost around 300K for a home with about 2000 sq.ft. i will see if i can find the show on you tube.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 20, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> Same..
> Germany has so many houses converted.. And it's not really that sunny there..



The most solar I've seen anywhere in the eastern US BY FAR is in Vermont. Hardly a sunny place.  That's my running joke with all my friends there.  "Dude, where's your solar panel? Thought it was a requirement to live here."

Renewables aren't perfect environmentally or economically, but you have to start somewhere.

After living along the Ohio River and in West Virginia and seeing the filth and destruction from fossils there and then seeing the devastation at Fukushima from afar, renewables are where the future tech focus should be.


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 20, 2015)

I installed a Apricus glass tube system , I had an extra pice of tubing in my shed that I didn't realize had  a caterpillar cocoon in . It jammed in the pump on collector side and turned the water into Steam . Got me thinking if any Co Gen systems out there ?


----------



## prsboogie (Nov 20, 2015)

prsboogie said:


> I had seen an episode of this NEW House couple years ago and there were students at M.I.T. at the time working on a system to store energy from solar in 55gal poly drums filled with plain H2O. They had a converter which they switched in the evening to change from charge to discharge. They estimated the system they had to cost around 300K for a home with about 2000 sq.ft. i will see if i can find the show on you tube.



https://youtu.be/k7ok8cOJbmo  This isn't the exact thing I'm looking for but this is very cool. No idea how much it will cost??


----------



## steamboat1 (Nov 20, 2015)

They shut down Vermont Yankee. Guess where the nuclear waste is being stored.


----------



## Jully (Nov 21, 2015)

Puck it said:


> A European company I think Danish has proposed putting a wind farm south Martha's Vineyard farther out to sea than the failed Cape Wind project.  The cost of power for these offshore turbine is quite a bit higher than on land turbines.  It baffles me at times.



I'm not familiar with that project, but true offshore wind is actually the only truly effective form of wind power in my opinion. It's used in northern Europe in the Atlantic and these are not your traditional turbines, they're massive, can't be seen from the shoreline and make no noise that impacts anyone cause no one is around.

Wind is way stronger multiple miles off the coast, putting farms in on smaller ridges just seems like putting a solar farm in a forest, or Seattle.


----------



## Jully (Nov 21, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> The most solar I've seen anywhere in the eastern US BY FAR is in Vermont. Hardly a sunny place.  That's my running joke with all my friends there.  "Dude, where's your solar panel? Thought it was a requirement to live here."
> 
> Renewables aren't perfect environmentally or economically, but you have to start somewhere.
> 
> After living along the Ohio River and in West Virginia and seeing the filth and destruction from fossils there and then seeing the devastation at Fukushima from afar, renewables are where the future tech focus should be.



Panel technology is improving at a surprising rate too. Being in a "sunny" area is not the same necessity that it was 6 or 7 years ago. I hadn't kept up with improvements and really didn't get it when there was this huge surge to get solar into the northeast. 

It's still way way better to be in a desert, but it's not as bad as it used to be in cloudier places.

On a side note, mountaintop removal in the Ohio River Valley is so sad. Completely agree with your sentiment.


----------



## marcski (Nov 21, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> But for that 57million dollars, they could build a natural gas plant and fuel it for how manyyears, decommission the plant, and still save money over a wind farm.



I don't doubt your underlying throry, but I believe your math is way off here. I think the cost of building a new nat. gas power plant is 10x your figure.


----------



## dlague (Nov 21, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> If there was a inexpensive way to store Solar energy ? The Billion dollar question .



That is the key to energy sources that are not constant.  The technology is close but the other key word inexpensive.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 21, 2015)

Crazy thing about wanting to do this is there's always a contingent of people saying it shouldn't/can't be done for whatever reason..
It's getting less and less... But still out there...


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 21, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> As far as the tax credits for renewable energy resources go,I AM hoping they end at 2016 and do not get extended.  Here’s why:
> 
> First of all, they force every taxpayer to pitch into the very expensive “new”technology, whether it is viable or not, and whether they approve of it or not.I understand stimulus to get the industry off the ground, but there has to be amake it or break it point.



I would argue that the make it or break it point at minimum should be when renewables have been given the same total investment as Fossil Fuels

From 1950-2010 US energy subsidies were

$369B Fossil fuels
$74B Renewables
$73B Nuclear
$90B Hydro

There's no question per BTU, fossil fuel subsidies are a better deal for tax payers. Some studies show 25X more bang for the buck. 

 However that doesn't account for all costs to society.  See my earlier concerns about mountain top removal and the filth along the Ohio River valley.  Additionally we've had the Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters, the wasteland that's been created in the Dakotas and Canada from shale oil production (a land area as large as the state of Florida for the Alberta fields alone) and we could also get into the direct loss of human lives from both the production of those fuels and wars associated with them.  How many people have solar panels killed?

So, for me, there's a lot more to it than just efficiencies and the miniscule federal tax line item drawn from my paycheck.


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 21, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> As far as the tax credits for renewable energy resources go,I AM hoping they end at 2016 and do not get extended.  Here’s why:
> 
> First of all, they force every taxpayer to pitch into the very expensive “new”technology, whether it is viable or not, and whether they approve of it or not.I understand stimulus to get the industry off the ground, but there has to be amake it or break it point.
> 
> ...


 
The unit price isn't that great , it's all the extra Field piping or wells that adds about 1/3 . If you have a pond or spring that reduces the cost considerably . The last system I did had radiant floor heat and forced air ,3400sft house had 5000' pipe 800 aluminum heat transfer plates ( 6 screws in each one ) 4,800! , Labor was insane especially last winter trying to weave pipe through joist spaces.


----------



## marcski (Nov 21, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> Marcski, you make a valid point. The premise is that for 57 million worth of windfarm, you get 30 KW  (3 kw each) working at about 25% capacity for a net of 7.5 KW for 57 million. Now take a natural gas generator. You say it will cost 10 times, fair enough. Let's agree that it does. Look at how much more power is generated. It will be much, much more than 75 KW.


Understood. But isn't the point to establish green energy sources.  The industry (green energy) is in its infancy and clearly has ways to go. Of course, older, more established sources of energy generation may be more efficient, they have been around for so long, they've been tweaked and perfected as far as efficiency.  So, again you may be correct in that for every dollar spent today on electric generation, the largest amount of energy reaped may very well be from a nat. gas or traditionally fueled plant, but, in order to attempt to perfect green energy, whether it be solar or wind, there need to be attempts to build them now and see how they perform and then tweak and work on them over time just as the coal and gas plants have done. Without these early projects, nothing would change and the air we breathe will get dirtier and dirtier.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 21, 2015)

Solar certainly is in its infancy state as evidenced by the strides being made in conversion efficiency.

I still say there's more to be considered than subsidies / free market pricing.

http://m.fastcompany.com/3029771/se...of-the-alberta-tar-sands-from-1000-feet-above

Look at the pictures. An area of North America larger than all of New England looks like that.  That's why I shake my head when people complain about how unsightly Wind Farms are.


----------



## yeggous (Nov 21, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Solar certainly is in its infancy state as evidenced by the strides being made in conversion efficiency.
> 
> I still say there's more to be considered than subsidies / free market pricing.
> 
> ...



When people complain about solar not being cost competitive, they are almost always missing the point of spot prices. Electricity prices fluctuate throughout the day. Solar production peaks during the afternoon on sunny days, especially during the summer. This nicely coincides with when prices are highest. Solar does not need to be competitive with the monthly averaged price (the one you see on your electric bill).


----------



## marcski (Nov 22, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> I do not agree that the industry is still in its infancy.They had wind farms, huge ones, long established way back when the movie ET,the extra-terrestrial came out. When was that? 1982. That’s 33 years ago. Andit wasn’t even all that new way back then. I say it’s time they figure it outand become viable in the free market.


Ok. So 33 years for wind. How much less for solar?  And how long have coal fired electric plants been around. Over 100 years, no??  Compared to "traditional" coal or nat. gas fired electric plants, wind and solar are in their infancy.


----------



## Scruffy (Nov 22, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> I do not agree that the industry is still in its infancy.They had wind farms, huge ones, long established way back when the movie ET,the extra-terrestrial came out. When was that? 1982. That’s 33 years ago. Andit wasn’t even all that new way back then. I say it’s time they figure it outand become viable in the free market.



When we talk about renewables, let's assume the modern era of renewables (circa 1982 for solar -the first photovoltaic cells were developed in 1954, the first experiments in photovoltaic was 1839-, wind has been used for energy (pumping water) since 200 B.C. Wind for producing electricity, circa 1940's during WWI - necessity is indeed the mother of all things, big and small!

So, yes, for the modern era, they are indeed still in their infancy because their development/adoption keeps getting interrupted by rather larger fossil fuel price fluctuations. Every time the price of oil rises significantly we see small scale (homes, small businesses and such) adoption of renewable energy systems on the rise, this helps drive R&D. Conversely, whenever we go through any significant price reduction, esp. for any length of time, we see a mitigation in adoption. We've seen these large fluctuations since the 1970's oil embargo, and now currently with the Saudi's price war against shale oil. You see the same thing happen with vehicle type purchases; when gas is expensive, cars that get good MPG, or hybrid/electric  are selling like hotcakes, when gas is cheap, not so much.  

Oil and coal, on the other hand, had no competing industry to inhibit their uptake. Wood and whale oil had no one lobbing to protect their interests back in the day. 

When we see fossil fuel prices consistently high, is when we'll see real innovation in not only in renewables, but vehicle design.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 24, 2015)

Alchemist Brewery going all solar

http://m.stowetoday.com/waterbury_r...140-8e26-11e5-88ba-1b242fb7c778.html?mode=jqm


----------



## BenedictGomez (Nov 24, 2015)

Wind power.

The _"hamsters on wheels"_ of the energy sector.

  Really expensive purebred hamsters, on solid gold, diamond-encrusted wheels.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Nov 24, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> We could *look at Amtrak. Tons of tax dollars supporting a business that the private industry does not wish to build. *This industry is farfrom its infancy and when has it last operated in the black? At some point any business has to get beyond developmental and stand on its own.



I would argue that a private operator 100% could make the DC to Beantown route extremely profitable.  

And to answer your question, the answer is "never". 

*Amtrak has literally, NEVER operated in the black*, a fact that I believe would shock many if not most Americans (including you I presume given the use of "last" in your question).  

AMTRAK - *A M*onetary *T*axpayer *R*ipoff of *A*merican *K*nuckleheads


----------



## wtcobb (Nov 24, 2015)

Just gonna leave this here:


----------



## wtcobb (Nov 24, 2015)

More reading:
http://www.techinvestingdaily.com/report/3-solar-technology-stocks-you-must-own/1441

Solar is down to $0.36/watt (compared to $77/watt when introduced in the late '70's). 

In regards to AMTRAK, here's a wild concept currently in a design contest:
http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/06/hyperloop.html


----------



## Scruffy (Nov 24, 2015)

Using Amtrak as an example is a apples to or oranges comparison. Amtrak aligns better with the Post Office for an example of government funds keeping an unprofitable public service going for the betterment of society.

Look no further than the oil industry if you want apples to apples.

Everyone loves to talk about subsidies as the evil bane of our existence, but the fact of the matter is that every one of us lives our modern cushy lives on the backs of government subsidies. Without which, we wouldn't be typing on this internet, driving to work, let alone the mountains to ski, or getting easy food. One of the jobs of government is to grease industries, get over it. We all live on the shoulders of those that came before us. A lot of those shoulders had help.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 24, 2015)

Good points. The farming industry receives billions.


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 24, 2015)

The post office is self funded.
AMTRAK get grants..  

At least that's what I thought..


----------



## marcski (Nov 24, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> The post office is self funded.
> AMTRAK get grants..
> 
> At least that's what I thought..


Post office perennially loses Billions.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/11/postal-service-reports-1-5-billion-loss-in-second-quarter/

https://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2014/pr14_059.htm


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 24, 2015)

marcski said:


> Post office perennially loses Billions.
> 
> http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/11/postal-service-reports-1-5-billion-loss-in-second-quarter/
> 
> https://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2014/pr14_059.htm



Yes but it's self funded..


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 24, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> From the article:
> 
> The net loss includes $5.7 billion for the prefunding requirement of the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefit Fund and an additional $1.2 billion in non-cash workers’ compensation expense, consisting of $485 million related to changes in interest rates and $697 million of other non-cash workers’ compensation expense. These items are outside of management’s control.
> 
> ...



They get crushed by this..
People have it out for the USPO...  Not sure why....


----------



## Edd (Nov 25, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> They get crushed by this..
> People have it out for the USPO...  Not sure why....



Can they be replaced by the private sector (UPS, Fed Ex)?  If so, I can see why people would want it closed.


----------



## deadheadskier (Nov 25, 2015)

The usual arguments against private alternatives is that they won't have stores in all communities like the Post Office does.

I think the USPS can still downsize and close some locations.

Around us there's no need for the Newfields office.  I'm sure there are hundreds of locations like that all around the country.


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 25, 2015)

Edd said:


> Can they be replaced by the private sector (UPS, Fed Ex)?  If so, I can see why people would want it closed.



Why would they care?


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Nov 25, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> Agreed, and I can see them shutting down Saturday deliveries. End the swing shifts and extra manpower.



People that work do depend on Saturday delivery...


----------



## Edd (Nov 25, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> Why would they care?



Well, many want as few government services as possible.


----------



## Scruffy (Nov 25, 2015)

Increasingly, the post office is being contracted to be the "last mile" for UPS and Fedx, since they have RFD going anyway. This should help their bottom line, hopefully.

Funny snippet I heard somewhere, can't remember where - Post office is the best bargain going; where else can you walk up to someone, and give them 47 cents and say "Hey buddy, will you take this letter to Alaska for me?"


----------



## Edd (Nov 25, 2015)

Scruffy said:


> Funny snippet I heard somewhere, can't remember where - Post office is the best bargain going; where else can you walk up to someone, and give them 47 cents and say "Hey buddy, will you take this letter to Alaska for me?"



Yeah, by that measure, the post office is magical. They should triple their rates.


----------



## ScottySkis (Nov 26, 2015)

Their some of these on next to Jiminy Peak. I believe it covers their electronic bills for all winter operations.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/02/27/ski.wind.turbine/index.html?eref=rss_tech


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Nov 26, 2015)

ScottySkis said:


> Their some of these on next to Jiminy Peak. I believe it covers their electronic bills for all winter operations.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/02/27/ski.wind.turbine/index.html?eref=rss_tech



The only turbine at Jiminey that has anything to do with the mtn is the 1 on propert off of West Way. The 10 across the valley ship all of theit power off to thr boston area. They took some guidence from Jiminy, on installation as they are the aame model, but otherwise unrelated.
Jiminy did install a solar field this summer to greatly increase their power making potential. They also have a steam recovery system in the hotel that spins some power generators making some power as well.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Nov 26, 2015)

uphillklimber said:


> Interesting article on Jiminy. They produce $450,000.00 worth of electricity, a third of their total need. It would be interesting to see what the one turbine cost. I know 10 all together cost 37 million in my back yard, but they could all share access road and shipping costs, etc. Let's say it cost 4 million. That's less than 9 years to pay back. Not so bad....



$3.5 mill 9 or 10 yrs ago. I do not know the up keep costs per yr though.


----------



## Not Sure (Nov 26, 2015)

Failures while uncommon can be crazy!


uphillklimber said:


> Essentially, someone to monitor and watch over the auto system to feather the blades to optimal angle. Some lubrication. Almost a cheap to generate as anything, once in place.


----------



## darent (Dec 6, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Failures while uncommon can be crazy!


we have a wind generator at the high school, the bearings went and the repair was very costly. It has been running for just 2 years.two  towns in the Cape Cod area are being forced to remove their wind turbines because of  noise and light flutter complaints.


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Dec 7, 2015)

Political Correctness has absolutely nothing to do with it..  So easy there Mr Trump...  

Being self sufficient is what I'm all about..


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Dec 7, 2015)

The Political Correct thing... Trump is leading the charge..

I'm not doing this to make anyone think I'm a certain way - I just want energy independence...


----------



## ScottySkis (Dec 7, 2015)

Funky_Catskills said:


> The Political Correct thing... Trump is leading the charge..
> 
> I'm not doing this to make anyone think I'm a certain way - I just want energy independence...



Vote for Bernie s.


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Dec 8, 2015)

Been noticing more solar installations up here in Hunter.   
I think the old style houses built to face north and south with straight roofs are the big candidates..  Or maybe I'm just not noticing the others..


----------



## wtcobb (Dec 8, 2015)

South/SSE facing is the proper direction for solar panels to maximize exposure, especially in the northern latitudes where declination plays a bigger role. For my location in northern NH I have ~15* declination.

Last year I lived in home that was built and designed for solar - they matched the perfect angle when building to maximize solar exposure, especially in winter. The house also had passive solar design being high on a hill with large windows and stone interior. Pretty cool place.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 30, 2016)

game changer

https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/28/t...runch)&utm_content=FaceBook&sr_share=facebook

Attractive and 

[FONT=&quot]" Tesla’s roof cost less than the full cost of a roof and electricity will be competitive or better than the cost of a traditional roof combined with the cost of electricity from the grid, Musk said. "

Once off peak storage technology catches up, I think there's little doubt that solar technology is going to be cheaper than fossil for electricity generation. [/FONT]


----------



## Puck it (Oct 30, 2016)

There are also other companies working on paints that can produce energy from solar.  These are not as far along as the roof products.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 30, 2016)

Uphillklimber - prediction: by 2025 or even much sooner, there will be a battery the size of a car battery or smaller capable of powering a 4 bedroom home for a full day.  

Tesla is already almost there today: https://www.tesla.com/powerwall

With how fast technology is moving and microsizing the concept of a basement with large areas of caustic chemicals or a wall of batteries lining the back of your house will be archaic very soon.  

As far as the utility companies are concerned, if I were CEO of one these companies, I'd be having internal discussions on how to adapt my business to one of mostly power delivery to  one that  services off grid equipment as a major portion of the business.  It would not surprise me at all if most of the grid as we know it disappears in my lifetime.  



Sent from my XT1565 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 30, 2016)

I am aware that it doesn't beat the power company on price today, but it will in the not too distant future.  

I fully expect to see 3D printed homes with solar becoming a regular new construction practice.  20 years maybe? Hard to tell with how fast technology is moving.  Those solar shingles that Tesla are producing? They won't be made in factories. The raw materials needed will be brought right to the construction site and 3D printed right onto the home.  That goes for most other parts of the house too.  

Sent from my XT1565 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 30, 2016)

I'm not making an argument on current tech. I assume you are also quoting time frames based upon your unique situation and power rates for your local area.

Sent from my XT1565 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## darent (Nov 1, 2016)

watching a house here, entire roof was shingled in solar shingles. be interesting to get data in a year.


----------



## dlague (Nov 1, 2016)

uphillklimber said:


> Yes. my particular situation, but they are applicable to all in my area. Maine CMP prices.
> 
> No arguments, just trying to show how the tech has progressed. I was truly hopeful I could do it this year. I'm gonna hold out that the tech gets better.



I worked for a utility back east and was part of a Community Solar Project where we planned on building a 5-6 acre solar farm.  The rate payers would then be able to purchase the output of a panel and could purchase up to ten of them.  We then conducted a survey of interests and while we had pretty good fed back with abut 10% doing for the greener good the others did not like the payback period which was 15-17 years.  In the end we opted not to implement it due to risks associated with not selling all the panels.  It is still too expensive for most.  Others do not mind since it is green energy.


----------

