Clean Energy & Efficiency

johnfás wrote:

Sure isn't even their voltage less efficient? They use 120V whereas we use 230V for domestic supply.

Could question - I don't the answer to that but doesn't it depend amont other things on the number of step and step-down yokes in between your power plant and your end point ? EVM or someone would have a good opinion on that probably.

Just reading ecogeek which reports that researches in Penn State have found cheap ways of making hydrogen using stainless steel in the shape of a toilet brush instead of platinum. It's lovely when something simple like that is found as a solution. Ecogeek says the platinum costs 15c while the stainless steel brush costs just 3c.

The importance of this is for splitting water to create hydrogen cheaply. It must be ideal for local projects where there is plenty of excess wind at times and where a 'battery' would be useful to store the excess. That battery could be a hydrogen-based system.



http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2586/

Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) have been developed over the last few years as a way to produce hydrogen from food scraps and waste water. To put it very simply, the microbes feed on the waste and with the help of electricity and a catalyst, hydrogen is made. So far, expensive platinum has been used as the catalyst in this process, which has been effective, but the cost has held the technology back. Now researchers at Penn State have found a cheap substitute: stainless steel.

A piece of stainless steel works as a catalyst, but is only one-third as effective as the platinum, but researchers found that arranging the stainless steel in the form of a high-density bristle brush upped the hydrogen production to match and even exceed that of the platinum. The best part is that while the platinum part costs 15 cents, the stainless steel brush only costs 3 cents.

The researchers are still experimenting to find the best types and arrangements of stainless steel to maximize the hydrogen production, and even once those things are figured out, scientists will still have to discover a way to scale up this technology to be commercially viable. It seems daunting, but decreasing the cost will go a long way in allowing further progress.

via MIT Technology Review

This is a monitor / television screen and it looks good, uses less energy than other yokes and is very nearly on the shelves. I haven't a plasma yet but I might just wait for this class of a yoke to hit the shelves properly.


Toshiba Develops OLED Television Wallpaper


http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/category/oled+/

Cleantechnica
Many of us are accustomed to watching TV on high-quality plasma and LCD screens, but we pay a severe price in energy inefficiency. Toshiba has come up with a solution to our energy woes: flexible OLED paper that doubles as a TV screen.



The paper, which is significantly more energy efficient than both LCD and plasma, uses light that has been redirected using a fine grating created by self-assembling nano-particles. In addition to projecting moving pictures, the paper could also project images. Toshiba’s paper could also be used to emit light — effectively eliminating the need for traditional lighting.

The television wallpaper is currently in the early stages of research, and is many years away from commercial production.
http://cleantechnica.com/2009/02/25/toshiba-develops-oled-television-wallpaper/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/category/oled+/

Wattz On - a way of finding out how many watts your life costs. Like a carbon footprint thing but measured in watts. You can go to a site and find out how much wattage you use.

The next stage is to calculate how much wattage people in positions of power cost / save everyone else through the multiplier effect of their actions in society ... and how their actions clump the wattage towards or away from other people ...

Quote :

Today's Greener Gadgets Conference featured keynote speaker Saul Griffith: inventor, entrepreneur and science-geek extraordinaire. He spent the first half of his presentation explaining how he's come to quantify his personal impact on the earth through adding up the watts it takes to power his life.

From air travel and driving to the food he consumes and the stuff he owns, the average amount of watts his lifestyle requires is close to 18,000, while the average American clocks in at 11,500 watts. He was surprised by this - he drives a hybrid, bikes often, eats locally, etc. Shouldn't all these things amount to a lower watt demand? He had news for us too - we are all probably racking up way more watts than we think.

In order to help all of us identify exactly where we stand, Griffith and his friends created Wattz On, a website devoted to calculating personal energy consumption based on individual lifestyle. The website aims to prove that our energy use can in fact be measured and knowing our impact can help us to analzye our worse habits and change them. Ready to face your energy reality? Click here.

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2594/

Have you seen or heard about this Audi - The Pickens Plan?

LINK. (Click the ' I've already signed up button ' to bypass the signing up page.)

Hermes wrote:

Have you seen or heard about this Audi - The Pickens Plan?

LINK. (Click the ' I've already signed up button ' to bypass the signing up page.)

He's the man who wants to build a huge windfarm in Texas - it sounds very honest, hard to argue with it. Very patriotic too - would you be suspicious of it ? It looks like a great political moment in that video ....

America consumes 20 million barrels of oil per day while producing 6 million barrels. That's our problem as much as their problem (daily world consumption of oil ~87m barrels) and they have to try to get themselves off their addiction and I reckon because it's going to employ alternative technologies and avenues it'll be mostly democratic and the prosperity should be distributed well enough. Into the bargain it's likely that they'll need to conserve a lot more too from now on as well as scaling down their gluttony, some of the evidence of that already being the implosion of GM and the likes of the Hummer range, so because of that, pollution should be less too.

The dividend is that the American nation has a steady supply of indigenous energy and also given their industrial and entrepreneurial history it's not unthinkable that they will overdo themselves by inventing tech which will make green energy production a doddle for everyone on the planet.

Hermes wrote:

Have you seen or heard about this Audi - The Pickens Plan?

LINK. (Click the ' I've already signed up button ' to bypass the signing up page.)

Is the plan as he outlined on the whiteboard presentation video link ?

Take the 22% natural gas out of power generation (to be replaced by wind) and put it into transportation fuel. Thereby reducing oil imports by 300 Billion dollars. Sounds good to me ...

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Have you seen or heard about this Audi - The Pickens Plan?

LINK. (Click the ' I've already signed up button ' to bypass the signing up page.)

Is the plan as he outlined on the whiteboard presentation video link ?

Take the 22% natural gas out of power generation (to be replaced by wind) and put it into transportation fuel. Thereby reducing oil imports by 300 Billion dollars. Sounds good to me ...

That's the central thesis of it. It's a bit more developed and can be viewed by following the links. They're talking about updating the central power grid, providing incentives for homeowners to upgrade the insulation in their homes and it deals with ideas to create employment too. The plan is available as a PDF and can be found here.

I'm still frustrated by the new light bulbs. I am so used to turning lights off when I leave a room, it is hard to stop. When I am going to leave a room and come back in a while, I am never sure whether or not to turn off the light.

They seem to me to work for rooms that are occupied for hours at a time, but do they make any sense for hallways, kitchens and bathrooms that one is in and out of for a few minutes ?

And what about all that mercury ? It is very, very toxic.

Any advice?

cactus flower wrote:

I'm still frustrated by the new light bulbs. I am so used to turning lights off when I leave a room, it is hard to stop. When I am going to leave a room and come back in a while, I am never sure whether or not to turn off the light.

They seem to me to work for rooms that are occupied for hours at a time, but do they make any sense for hallways, kitchens and bathrooms that one is in and out of for a few minutes ?

And what about all that mercury ? It is very, very toxic.

Any advice?

They last for 8 years maybe more. Aren't the old bulbs the same price more or less so if they go in your hallway then you could replace it with a bulb that lasts 8 years. The technology will change again to LEDs or something in the meantime. Why exactly are you frustrated ?



On Algae:

Algae-based biofuel company Aurora Biofuels, after successfully concluding an 18-month trial at its pilot plant, said today it’s ready to begin developing its second factory. Aurora also said that it’s named Bob Walsh, formerly president of LS9, as its new chief executive to help commercialize its technology.

..
http://earth2tech.com/2009/03/04/aurora-calls-pilot-algae-plant-a-success-hires-new-ceo/
..

Aurora hasn’t said what kind of algae it is using, only that it’s developing a portfolio of different strains that are ideal for different climates.

..

Aurora claims its technology can deliver algae at about $30 a ton, which would translate into a mere 65 cents for enough to make a gallon of biodiesel. That compares to $2-$3 per gallon for sugar, Walsh says. Because algae is so oily, it also uses land more efficiently than sugarcame, he claims, saying it would take 400 square miles of sugarcane — but only 22 square miles of algae — to make 70 million gallons of biodiesel per year.

The company, which raised $20 million in its second round of funding in June, said it has enough money to build its demonstration plant, for which it’s looking at several sites around the world. The plant will start out at 20 acres, enough to produce about 120,000 gallons of biodiesel per year, and will grow to 50 acres, which will be the company’s commercial size, Walsh said. Aurora expects to begin operating its first commercial plant in 2012.




Peak Oil shmeak oil

I think the time delay to full brightness is driving cactus nuts ?

Hermes wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Have you seen or heard about this Audi - The Pickens Plan?

LINK. (Click the ' I've already signed up button ' to bypass the signing up page.)

Is the plan as he outlined on the whiteboard presentation video link ?

Take the 22% natural gas out of power generation (to be replaced by wind) and put it into transportation fuel. Thereby reducing oil imports by 300 Billion dollars. Sounds good to me ...

That's the central thesis of it. It's a bit more developed and can be viewed by following the links. They're talking about updating the central power grid, providing incentives for homeowners to upgrade the insulation in their homes and it deals with ideas to create employment too. The plan is available as a PDF and can be found here.

I just realised that such a sensible plan would not work here because Shell own (what percentage ?) of our natural gas.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Have you seen or heard about this Audi - The Pickens Plan?

LINK. (Click the ' I've already signed up button ' to bypass the signing up page.)

Is the plan as he outlined on the whiteboard presentation video link ?

Take the 22% natural gas out of power generation (to be replaced by wind) and put it into transportation fuel. Thereby reducing oil imports by 300 Billion dollars. Sounds good to me ...

That's the central thesis of it. It's a bit more developed and can be viewed by following the links. They're talking about updating the central power grid, providing incentives for homeowners to upgrade the insulation in their homes and it deals with ideas to create employment too. The plan is available as a PDF and can be found here.

I just realised that such a sensible plan would not work here because Shell own (what percentage ?) of our natural gas.

The temptation is for me to move rapidly into a political rant about the theft of our resources (what we've given to Shell would see to Ireland's needs for about seven years). That'd divert the flow of the thread. And anyway, ye all know how I feel about that already. So I'll take a different path. There are billions, probably trillions, worth of gas off our shores, that we haven't given away. We should invest in being able to harvest it. It most likely won't solve our problems. But it would give us plenty of breathing room to attempt to do so.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

I think the time delay to full brightness is driving cactus nuts ?

I've got used to the time delay. Its just that I heard that these bulbs are not economic unless you leave them on for quite a while, but I don't know how long.

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

I think the time delay to full brightness is driving cactus nuts ?

I've got used to the time delay. Its just that I heard that these bulbs are not economic unless you leave them on for quite a while, but I don't know how long.

If the room is warm they light up better too don't they ?

Your old bulbs were 100 watts while these are around 11 watts or so. Units are measured in kilowatt-hours and cost 16c with ESB, 14c with Airtricity - about 15c per unit, both of them.

A unit means you have to burn 1000watts in one hour in order to clock up 15c. Doesn't sound like much, does it but it all adds up to a couple of hundred quid per bill for a lot of people judging from the ESB bill vote.

At least that's how I understand it anyway but I could have it arseways again.

What does this mean for your bulb of say 10 watts ? I'm under the impression that if you leave a 10 watt bulb on for an hour you will have burned 10 watts in an hour where burning 1000 watts in an hour costs 15c so you've burned a lot less than 15c. Is this right ? You will have burned one hundredth of a 15c unit = 15c/100 - a bit more than a tenth of a cent. Whereas with the 100 watt bulb left on for an hour you burn 1.5c - a lot more.

You have to leave the 100 watt bulb on for ten hours to clock up 15c minus the (goddam) VAT whereas you have to leave a 10 watt bulb on for 100 hours to clock up the same (-VAT too). For a 50 watt bulb you have to leave it on twenty hours before you are out of pocket by 15c. It doesn't sound like much but an electric kettle is 2000watts for example so leaving that on for one hour means you'll burn out 30c - a small fortune. If you leave that on for an hour a day that's 30c x 60days = €18 !!! That's dear tea in two months minus the VAT too.

Did I get that ESB stuff above half right EVM?

Have ye ever heard about energy from Salt ?

from New Scientist:
"Salinity power" exploits the chemical differences between salt and fresh water, and this project only hints at the technology's potential: from the mouth of the Ganges to the Mississippi delta, almost every large estuary could produce a constant flow of green electricity, day and night, rain or shine, without damaging sensitive ecosystems or threatening fisheries (see map). One estimate has it that salinity power could eventually become a serious power player, supplying as much as 7 per cent of today's global energy needs.

In an attempt to prove that this isn't just a pipe dream, Veerman's team has done lab tests on a prototype salinity power generator, and are now planning to scale it up. Yet a group of Norwegian engineers have gone one stage further, with their own twist on salinity power.

Veerman and his colleagues at Wetsus, the Dutch Centre for Sustainable Water Technology in Leeuwarden, believe they can tap energy locked up in the North Sea's saltwater by channelling it, along with fresh water from the Rhine, into a novel kind of battery. With a large enough array of these batteries, he says, the estuary could easily provide over a gigawatt of electricity by a process they've called Blue Energy - enough to supply about 650,000 homes.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126972.000-salt-solution-cheap-power-from-the-rivers-mouth.html



http://www.physorg.com/news4142.html



http://www.ntnu.no/gemini/1999-01/42.html


http://www.leonardo-energy.org/drupal/book/export/html/2243

Auditor #9 wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

I think the time delay to full brightness is driving cactus nuts ?

I've got used to the time delay. Its just that I heard that these bulbs are not economic unless you leave them on for quite a while, but I don't know how long.

If the room is warm they light up better too don't they ?

Your old bulbs were 100 watts while these are around 11 watts or so. Units are measured in kilowatt-hours and cost 16c with ESB, 14c with Airtricity - about 15c per unit, both of them.

A unit means you have to burn 1000watts in one hour in order to clock up 15c. Doesn't sound like much, does it but it all adds up to a couple of hundred quid per bill for a lot of people judging from the ESB bill vote.

At least that's how I understand it anyway but I could have it arseways again.

What does this mean for your bulb of say 10 watts ? I'm under the impression that if you leave a 10 watt bulb on for an hour you will have burned 10 watts in an hour where burning 1000 watts in an hour costs 15c so you've burned a lot less than 15c. Is this right ? You will have burned one hundredth of a 15c unit = 15c/100 - a bit more than a tenth of a cent. Whereas with the 100 watt bulb left on for an hour you burn 1.5c - a lot more.

You have to leave the 100 watt bulb on for ten hours to clock up 15c minus the (goddam) VAT whereas you have to leave a 10 watt bulb on for 100 hours to clock up the same (-VAT too). For a 50 watt bulb you have to leave it on twenty hours before you are out of pocket by 15c. It doesn't sound like much but an electric kettle is 2000watts for example so leaving that on for one hour means you'll burn out 30c - a small fortune. If you leave that on for an hour a day that's 30c x 60days = €18 !!! That's dear tea in two months minus the VAT too.

Exactly right. A Kilowatt- Hour is a unit of energy. Power x time.

So this computer is drawing about 28 watts according to a plug-in reader I have. That means I have to leave it on for 35 hours before a single kilowatt-hour is gone ? 1000/28 ?

That means that leaving a laptop on for 35 hours costs just under 16c with the ESB and just over 14c with Airtricity.....

That's cheap enough - is it right though ? It means a computer left on for 60 days at 15c a KWh would cost about €7.50 in electricity ... ?

That's quite low. Would you know how long my computer would take to drain a 12V car battery ?