Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
green work shop

For The Energy Future To Come

Recommended Posts

For The Future To Come

 

When you do your research. You discover that there is only one rational and hence logical renewable energy technology worth investing in. In terms of manufacturing as well as purchasing for home owner use. And well, this is being said so that you will know that a time is coming to make that investment.

 

Energy-for-the-Future-DaimlerChrysler.jpg : "the world will no longer be able to use the last bit of oil for fueling transportation"

 

Looking to the future. More people are beginning to realize. That our world is built up and run upon fuels that are limited in supply. And so they are more concerned than ever. Everyone knows, that the more oil is used. The more our fuel resources dwindle away. And at some point ahead. What is left of the oil in the ground will have to be conserved to supply the world's need for lubricants. Since machines in the far future, will need oil for lubrication. And this focus will be more important than using oil for fuel. Since using oil as fuel reduces it faster than using it for lubrication.

 

Hence the world will no longer be able to use the last bit of oil for fueling transportation. In turn our world which is built up around a fossil fuel run economy. Where there are markets based upon oil for transportation fuels. Will find that those markets and economies will collapse. And those businesses based upon gasoline distribution will fold. And such things as the transAtlantic and transPacific shipping trades. Will find that the cost of thier fuel for shipping cargo. Will rise to extraordinary prices. The world and it's various national economies, as well as it's collective market. Will come to a hault.

 

As time goes by. Land, air and sea shipping cost will steadily increase. We have already experienced the way things work when oil prices on the world market rise. Through the long period of years we endured during the Bush Administration. Where the cost of oil drove up the price of all goods across the board. Simply because the transportation cost of those goods increased via the higher cost of diesle fuel and gasoline. And everybody was effected. From the home owner in the private sector, to the grocery store owner. And just about every other business had to make adjustments. And had to endure less than ideal profits. And as we know. Some buisinesses folded because of this. And today, we also realize that when the price of oil went back down. This did not result in the increased price in goods going back down. And so, the cost of everything is still elevated. It seems that everyone is still attempting to recover their losses.

 

There are allot of theories about the housing and banking market going around. And we have to realize that some mismanagement was involved. Yet if there was a time when people would default on their mortgages. And where an over speculation in building, would come about in a time when it would be hard to move homes. It would naturally occur after about 8 years of high oil prices. Hence this is all that we need to start off a scenario that leads to an economic collapse.

 

At this moment in time we need a new Energy Policy. Which will make the most, of what we know to be the best way to realize the greatest impact upon our energy requirements. Mathematically, the greatest energy impact that we can compute. Comes to us not by way of wind generators or solar electrical systems. But by way of a technology that has been on the market now and proved since 1985 (proprietary information).

 

Since renewable energy does not mean that the source of energy will pay for it's investment cost to purchase the technology or system. If someone wants us to believe that a specific renewable energy system, or specific Energy Policy is feasible and affordable. When in reality it is not. Then we have to wonder about the qualifications of those people to serve in the position they serve in. We would prefer to have electronic technicians and electrical engineers look over the various technologies and their cost. Versus the amount of power they produce. To determine what is the best investment that this nation can make.

 

Energy Policy wise. We can not afford to empliment high cost renewable energy systems. Without taking the first step towards affordable renewable energy. Which provides the greatest energy impact in the private sector.

 

Renewable energy, via sustainable resources. Does not always equate to cost savings. And does not always equate to affordability. Hence although we might have some resources that are renewable. The high cost of the technology to make use of those renewable resources. Is not sustainable cost wise. Hence this is why people are not investing into solar electrical systems at this moment in time.

 

Technology has yet to perfect an affordable means to harness solar energy for electrical power use. Hence the bottom line here is this. If you invest into high cost technologies in order to make use of renewable energy. The economy based upon those technologies is not sustainable. Which means that such notions for economies based around those technologies. Will go the way that economies based upon non renewable fossil fuels will go. Hence we can not replace non renewable resources with technologies who's cost are unsustainable.

 

Toady we have no other way to go but the way of more energy efficient building constructions. That makes good use of the most affordable and impacting kind of renewable energy. Which is not wind nor solar electrical systems. But some less costly to manufacture and most affordable to purchase. Which makes the wisest green renewable energy investment.

 

As an investor looking for a good manufacturing venture or as a home owner investing into a green home. Constructed with built in renewable energy features of the most affordable kind.

 

For those of you concerned about your personal expenses in the coming decade. Knowing that the price of oil will go up again. Likewise knowing that the price is unlikely to ever come back down when it does. Then you will want to investigate today. What you can do to position yourself to survive those times. And we suspect that the period of time that will be the toughest for the nation and it's economy. Will be the first decade within the time oil prices increase.

 

Be very careful about the direction you take in determining what some might perceive to be the future of renewable energy at this time. Please go to my profile page and read the About Me section to learn more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hence the world will no longer be able to use the last bit of oil for fueling transportation. In turn our world which is built up around a fossil fuel run economy. Where there are markets based upon oil for transportation fuels. Will find that those markets and economies will collapse. And those businesses based upon gasoline distribution will fold. And such things as the transAtlantic and transPacific shipping trades. Will find that the cost of thier fuel for shipping cargo. Will rise to extraordinary prices. The world and it's various national economies, as well as it's collective market. Will come to a hault.

It is not just a matter of losing transport fuel - and seeing the end of those long voyages for containerships,

It is also that the FOOD we live off now, will be far more expensive, or even unavailable.

 

I hate to sound so pessimistic, but it could mean mass starvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is not just a matter of losing transport fuel - and seeing the end of those long voyages for containerships,

It is also that the FOOD we live off now, will be far more expensive, or even unavailable.

 

I hate to sound so pessimistic, but it could mean mass starvation

 

None of us should be afraid to reflect some pessimisism. Since if the over all world does not soon come to it's senses. The scenario you mention is inevitable. And true it's scary to realize. I know that we can conserve some of our fuels by a mass conversion over to the most affordable kinds of renewable energy. In which case, implementing that conversion will buy us some time for the other technologies to catch up. In terms of innovations to make them more affordable. Otherwise, without the conversion over to affordable renewable energy occuring first. We will only find that we have used up our non renewable resources sooner, and hasten the inevitable. Which in turn will hurt the efforts of those doing research to improve the affordability of wind and solar for instance. Simply because there is no economy to support taxes for R&D grants and other funds. No funds, no jobs, no research gets done.

 

I spoke up on bio mass gasification in another thread. Which can fuel an automobile but it's kind of bulky. And it might be used to fuel a ship at sea, but again it is bulky unless you were to use denser coal as the fuel. But then at sea you have the matter of what to do with the spent ash. Hence gasification is not an answer for transportation by containerships. It might be tried though. But it does work well on land. It's best application is our answer to electrical generation for a community or for merely a home involved in renewable energy.

 

The implementation of affordable renewable energy for the home owner across the nations. Reduces our dependancy upon oil fired power plants (and there is still some of them around). It reduces oil used for fuel oil every winter. And it reduces the overall requirement for electrical power from power plants. Which reduces the number of loads of coal to the power plants. Which reduces the numbers of coal transportations. And hence reduces the amount of oil used in that transportation. Which requires lots of horsepower ~ which expends fuel faster than an automobile can. And it reduces the number of diesle fueled rail road transportations. Which hence conserves our fuel for the time being. Trains require lots of fuel for the kind of horsepower they need to carry the loads they carry.

 

High cost renewable energy systems move a little in the industrial sector. Where corporarations who have remote sites (like an oil rig) require a solar electrical system for a back up. But in the private sector, it's like a member of the forum over at Renewable Energy World Magazine said "pushing PV solar panels (on the market) is like pushing a large rock." Such high cost technologies are not moving in the private sector market. And lack of movement equates to an unsustainable market based around those technologies. Just because it is renewable energy, does not mean it equates to a sustainable green business model. Only affordable technologies are sustainable.

 

So I am pointing to the matter of everyone getting focused in on what is affordable. Because the affordable technologies will move when the time comes. However if we do not market them, then people will not know what to invest in today. And will not know what the marketing merits are. And as we all know marketing and advertising brings such things to the attention of the average person as well as the investor. Otherwise they are moth balled in a warehouse were no one knows they exist.

 

Anyways, we all need a common vision of what works. And then market the vision of what works and is affordable. And that will provide us all with a credible vision that others can bank on when the time comes.

 

I realize I am guilty of writing a bit. I tend to be analytical and so I detail information. I guess I am guilty of marketing information. So thats the way it is with me. But I try to be educational. I do not know it all, and I got things yet to learn. But I do not mind sharing what I do understand. And I understand the vision of green marketing and economics.

 

There are various green band wagons we can get on. Each are playing a tune as they go along to promote their vision and their choice renewable energy investments. However, not all of those investments are going to survive whats coming. Simply because that which works, and does so in an affordable way. Will be moving the market. While the technologies of the other band wagons find their markets coming to a stand sitll. Their stocks will dive as we understand it.

 

Back in the 30s and 40s. There were lines of tractors and trucks, from such entities as Mercedes, Volks Wagon. Which were manufactured with wood gasifiers. So, we can keep agriculture going if we have to by this means. And we can run a rail road again with steam or gasifiers. And so, we need to know what our answers are going to be, if we find ourselves one day coming into that Mad Max post apocalyptic scenario. Which will be set off by high oil prices. But unlike Mad Max we can fuel vehicles with wood and other bio masses in that kind of a scenario. I however want to head off that kind of future with affordable renewable energy today.

 

Below is a photo of a Vintage 1939 Wood Gas Powered Tractor.

 

Seeing that gasification has been in the past I am reminded of the verse that says "That which is, hath already been, and God requires that which is past." We have the best of the past and the best of today for our use.

 

A Wind And Solar Recommendation

 

I want to mention that in doing the math on energy production versus cost. I find that there is wind and solar systems that I will be using here at the Green Work Shop. The Honeywell Wind Turbine system, and the Kaneka Silcon "thin film PV" solar panel technology. These will make a good system with a back up wood gasifier for home energy needs. The turbine and the solar panel system means. That I will have energy production in between those times I decide to fool around with the gasifier. Where the gasifier is capable of allot more energy very quickly when needed. And I want the combustion engine portion of the system to be able to run on natural gas also. So this is the recommended electrical systems set up for the future. The merits of it's wisdom will come in handy in any emergency.

 

Little note.

I noticed that I am member 5,059 I think it is. And so yesterday I suggested that if each member made a link to this forum from a blog or other site. Then Google would rate this forum very high via the numbers of links to it. And so, I suggested this as a means to market the forum. And I would think that this would help more investors find their way here. So I hope members will understand the merits of marketing GEI. And I think I sounded pessimistic there to make a point. But I meant that so perhaps some would understand that we need to promote and market our presense and interest.

post-5059-1295193080_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There may well be starvation but it won't be in the rich world and post peak is not a world without intercontinental shipping.

 

I've forgotten the exact numbers but those ships are so damn big that cost per tonne between China and US or EU is single figure cents. Even if fuel doubled, trebeled, quadrupled, the price impact on consumer goods, coal or wheat is sod all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

has oil actually become any more expensive?

 

Gold-oil%20ratio.jpg

 

It is not just a matter of losing transport fuel - and seeing the end of those long voyages for containerships,

It is also that the FOOD we live off now, will be far more expensive, or even unavailable.

 

I hate to sound so pessimistic, but it could mean mass starvation

 

I hate to sound optimistic, but it could mean people get to eat actual food instead of crap like wheat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For The Future To Come

Looking to the future. More people are beginning to realize. That our world is built up and run upon fuels that are limited in supply. And so they are more concerned than ever. Everyone knows, that the more oil is used. The more our fuel resources dwindle away. And at some point ahead. What is left of the oil in the ground will have to be conserved to supply the world's need for lubricants.

 

True, more people are realising but from my experience when talking to the average person their concern currently is not about resource depletion (for most it is not even a factor they consider and are still of the opinion that oil is pumped from seemingly a bottomless pit) but the higher transportation, electricity and heating costs and the finger of blame is pointed directly at corporate greed and what they see as excessive taxation. Governments and the media are failing to explain all the causes for high oil prices. If the same amount of attention was spent on the dangers of resource depletion as is spent on climate change then perhaps this would change

 

At this moment in time we need a new Energy Policy. Which will make the most, of what we know to be the best way to realize the greatest impact upon our energy requirements. Mathematically, the greatest energy impact that we can compute. Comes to us not by way of wind generators or solar electrical systems. But by way of a technology that has been on the market now and proved since 1985 (proprietary information).

 

Since renewable energy does not mean that the source of energy will pay for it's investment cost to purchase the technology or system. If someone wants us to believe that a specific renewable energy system, or specific Energy Policy is feasible and affordable. When in reality it is not. Then we have to wonder about the qualifications of those people to serve in the position they serve in. We would prefer to have electronic technicians and electrical engineers look over the various technologies and their cost. Versus the amount of power they produce. To determine what is the best investment that this nation can make.

 

Part of the problem is that a large part of the advice given to government is not 'independent' and often has a bias towards the advisors own interests. Government interferes in the market place with policies of incentives that actually serve to stifle the market. (Example discussed here.)

 

 

Toady we have no other way to go but the way of more energy efficient building constructions. That makes good use of the most affordable and impacting kind of renewable energy. Which is not wind nor solar electrical systems. But some less costly to manufacture and most affordable to purchase.

 

This is being done in some places by setting minimum standards of efficiency for newly built housing with regards to methods of heating and hot water production. Solar is far more widely utilized (in the UK) to do this than any other renewable technology, especially on retrofit.

 

 

For those of you concerned about your personal expenses in the coming decade. Knowing that the price of oil will go up again. Likewise knowing that the price is unlikely to ever come back down when it does. Then you will want to investigate today. What you can do to position yourself to survive those times. And we suspect that the period of time that will be the toughest for the nation and it's economy. Will be the first decade within the time oil prices increase.

 

I agree the likelihood of this scenario is very high.

 

Would like to write more but my time is somewhat limited currently (I'm busier than I've ever been).

 

May I also point you, as new to the forum, to this thread which you may wish to comment on. :-)

 

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....showtopic=10550

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

INVESTMENT THEMES

 

(this is an excerpt from a letter that I have received from Adi Rayna) :

 

Five Horsemen headed our way

The big question is whether human ingenuity will overcome the lack of resources to support global growth or what Prof Morris calls the "five horsemen of the apocalypse" -climate change, famine, state failure, migration and disease take control over events. Prof Morris's view is that each age gets the idea which is needed to overcome the problems it faces.

 

A key part of the investment process, as I have noted in previous newsletters, is to develop a framework which identifies long term global trends in economics, markets, social development and politics, which should then be reflected in your strategic long term asset allocation. Martin Wolf highlights the "great convergence" as an "epoch-making transformation" in our world and I fully accept this view and it is therefore critical to develop an asset allocation strategy which deals with the possible implications. The "great convergence"* is inevitable, and while there are likely to be serious bumps along the way, they should be viewed as attractive buying opportunities to increase exposure to emerging market equities and commodities. The developed world is likely to provide periodic opportunities to buy stocks but I would argue that a typical investment portfolio (particularly if you reside in the emerging world) should be more heavily weighted in EM equities and commodities than developed world equities.

 

I attach below a graph provided by the IEA which illustrates the imbalance between expected demand and supply of oil - oil demand is projected to

increase by 1.2% per annum until 2035 (less than the prior growth rate of 2%) with 93% of the demand coming from non-OECD countries (mainly China and

India) while oil production is expected to increase by only 0.5% per annum (half the historical rate). With conventional oil production peaking in

2006, it assumes all oil gains from here forward will come from non-conventional sources and gas and coal-to-liquids programs! In addition,

with China and India taking-up most of the increase in oil production, there is an implied assumption that the OECD countries will actually reduce oil

consumption to make the numbers work! While this may all work out over time, the implications are that the trend in oil prices is up as reflected clearly in the graph below:

 

/source: http://economistsview.typepad.com/.a/6a00d...16c93ab970b-pop

 

== ==

 

*Great convergence: Emerging markets are on the rise, while the developed world is declining - I used to call it the Global Leveling some years ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is being done in some places by setting minimum standards of efficiency for newly built housing with regards to methods of heating and hot water production. Solar is far more widely utilized (in the UK) to do this than any other renewable technology, especially on retrofit.

What is also important for the future will be:

 

LOCATION - close to:

 

+ Jobs

+ Food production

+ Energy sources

 

Choose one, or better 2-3 of the above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting post, SCP.

And I think your posts are getting some "traction" here now.

The implementation of affordable renewable energy for the home owner across the nations. Reduces our dependancy upon oil fired power plants (and there is still some of them around). It reduces oil used for fuel oil every winter. And it reduces the overall requirement for electrical power from power plants. Which reduces the number of loads of coal to the power plants. Which reduces the numbers of coal transportations. And hence reduces the amount of oil used in that transportation. Which requires lots of horsepower ~ which expends fuel faster than an automobile can. And it reduces the number of diesle fueled rail road transportations. Which hence conserves our fuel for the time being. Trains require lots of fuel for the kind of horsepower they need to carry the loads they carry.

 

High cost renewable energy systems move a little in the industrial sector. Where corporarations who have remote sites (like an oil rig) require a solar electrical system for a back up. But in the private sector, it's like a member of the forum over at Renewable Energy World Magazine said "pushing PV solar panels (on the market) is like pushing a large rock." Such high cost technologies are not moving in the private sector market. And lack of movement equates to an unsustainable market based around those technologies. Just because it is renewable energy, does not mean it equates to a sustainable green business model. Only affordable technologies are sustainable.

What I find interesting, is the way that these ideas and the NEED FOR CHANGE are beginning to creep into the mainstream.

 

Here are some excerpts from an article from today's SCMP (in Hong Kong):

 

2.2 earths needed for HK lifestyle, WWF says

 

"Hong Kong people are living beyond the earth's limits.

 

A new WWF report shows that nore than the amount of resources needed for two earths would be required to sustain the pace of consumption if all the people in the world lived a lifestyle like that of Hongkongers.

 

The report says a HK resident on average uses 86kg of paper a year and eats 30.3 kg of beef a year, up from 15kg in 2007. This is more than seven times the amount consumed on the mainland and almost double that of the European Union, according to the WWF report, citing United States figures."

. . .

"...We (in HK) would need the equivalent resources of 2.2 planets... It is derived by evaluating production and trade flows of crops, timber, forests, fish and meat products, as well as the amount of forest land needed to absorb carbon dioxide emissions.

 

It is expressed in terms of global hectares, or gha, defined as hectares with world-average biological productivity. While on average a global citizen uses 1.8gha, a typical Hong Konger uses four."

. . .

"HK would always be an 'ecological debtor', meaning it would always need more resources than the land and sea mass can sustain, mainly because of its reliance on imports."

 

HK people use relatively little oil, because of the superb mass transit system, but because of the lack of space for growing food here, it is heavily reliant on imported food - and other resources, too.

 

Little note. I noticed that I am member 5,059 I think it is. And so yesterday I suggested that if each member made a link to this forum from a blog or other site. Then Google would rate this forum very high via the numbers of links to it. And so, I suggested this as a means to market the forum. And I would think that this would help more investors find their way here. So I hope members will understand the merits of marketing GEI. And I think I sounded pessimistic there to make a point. But I meant that so perhaps some would understand that we need to promote and market our presense and interest.

Great suggestion.

Worth a new thread too; perhaps I will start one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate SCP you have researched this area a great deal and I'm concerned that you may get the impression I'm trying to pull your post apart, I'm not. I'm no technical expert but have an interest in this sector as I believe the knowledge may give me an upper-hand in the coming years within the supply sector I work in, and any information you can impart in this discussion I welcome.

 

I'm not so sure on the viability of biomass gassification units here in the UK and similarly arranged countries for wholesale domestic use though I suspect this may be different in the U.S as living arrangements differ greatly. In retrofit, which would be the largest market, the drawbacks of these units are that they are very heavy, sensibly they should be located in an 'outhouse' which multi-apartment properties tend not to have, and single residency properties often require an extension of the property to locate the unit all adding to additional costs. Fuel storage may also be a problem. Legislation exists to enforce safe control of the exhaust which requires insulated twin-wall (stainless) steel flueing which can be extremely expensive and somewhat unsightly. In rural applications where heating oil is widely used biomass is becoming and will be a viable alternative as you have said. I don't disagree with your your comments regarding efficiency etc, I just cannot see in by far the commonest types of housing, how benefits can outweigh costs when other alternatives like ground/air-source, PV and solar are far more suitable as far as I can tell. It is essentially a case of 'horses for courses'.

 

Outside of the domestic market biomass does start to come into it's own for energy generation with it's lack of versatility being less of a problem. My only concern if I was running, just as an example, a pharmaceuticals manufacturing plant would be the supply chain of the fuel material. Losses involved in shut downs would be a major concern and I would want to be as certain as can be gauged accurately that the infrastructure to deliver that fuel is invunerable, or at least as or more reliable as what already exists.

 

For investors it must be a very difficult task to back winners in this sector as there is so much uncertainty. Personally if I were to invest I'd probably look into finding someone making component parts shared throughout the manufacturers across a range of technologies as a safer (though possibly less profitable) bet or to a company that will benefit from future required infrastructure changes.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All very good views here in these threads.

 

Underling

 

Your concerns for the outlook of gasification are well stated. The matter with gasification of bio mass, is that it results in lower emissions as compared to oil and coal. And the power plant is located outside the residence, there is no flue (with regards to your flue comment which I admit I might not understand your vision of the flue). Since the exhaust comes out of the combustion engine. And modern developments have lead to innovations in making the current trend in the technology even cleaner on it's emission. Unlike oil and coal. Wood and bio mass gasification does not contain long chain hydro carbons which are the trouble with coal and oil emissions, and coal also has heavy carbon emissions. Yet here in the USA many electrical power plants have turned to coal gasification because it dramatically lowers the emission to acceptable EPA levels, and it also stretches the efficiency and hence better conserves the non renewable resource.

 

To see what I mean about the way this works look at this gasification power plant called the Power Pallet which is a 10kW system. There is no flue and there are emission control systems. This will kind of help you to better envision the technology.

 

The Power Pallet as an example investment. Is rated at producing electricity for 2 to 3 cents / kW. Where I live the local power company charges 9 cents / kW. And many regions across the nation sell it for 12 cents. Agriculture waste such as left over nut shells, husk, corn cobs, etc can be put to work rather than be thrown away. Thus making farm enterprises more profitable and sustainable. And the gasifier can produce enough electrical power to charge up the battery bank of hybrid electrical automobiles. Thus enabling savings in that regards. A business venture for powering up automobiles, as an electrical service station can be built around this technology.

 

http://www.gekgasifier.com/gasification-st...r-genset-skids/

 

In the cities now the use of gasification will no doubt only be desired by a certain percentage of people. And so, other non emitting technologies are preferred there I can think of one very interesting one, that performs better than wind or solar PV systems. With no emissions or battery banks. And it outperforms wind and solar electrical systems.

 

The matter is that high cost renewable energy technologies are not sustainable.

 

Affordable = Sustainable Market

Un~Affordable = Unsustainable On The Market

 

BP has announced it is selling it's assets in two solar manufacturing plants. One here in the USA and one in Spain. (The product is not moving on the market.) Since BP suffered allot of money going out in the oil well dissaster. And their stocks suffered. They have to cut their losses, and so cut free first of all those things that are not sustainable on the market. Example: the plant here in the USA went under and is closed. So like I am saying as an example here, Un~Affordable = Unsustainable On The Market.

 

So this is the crux of the matter. But I am optimistic with technology that exist, seeing what has come along in technology in the past 20 years. Which I can see has lacked advertising and marketing. I realize a hopeful scenario on the horizon. So I am not pessimistic, though without public education, no one will know what exist that is affordable. And yet as long as this is the case, we are heading into trouble.

 

~The project that uses solar water heating, well I have considered that. But the cost of the solar water heating panel technology. Is kind of high compared to another means or methods of renewable clean energy heating with no emissions, chemical fluids, nor batteries. Which again is more affordable.

 

International Rock Super Star

 

Your question about whether oil has become any more expensive as compared to gold I believe you are referring too. Well I understand that gold still has about the same buying power today, that it had 100 years ago. But since the nations stopped using gold backed currencies. When gold is selling high. It tells me that the currency has been devalued. And so, if the currency can be made strong again. Gold prices drop and then it is the time to buy. Gold might still go up some here, and some folk might be able to still buy and turn a profit. But I wonder how long this can continue? Though in our current situation it does look like gold will be high for awhile. I just wonder how far it will go and how long? And if it does continue upwards, it merely means that currency is continuing to devalue. If gold goes on up and were to hit $3000 then that means we will be suffering the world over on the general price of everything.

 

You said "I hate to sound optimistic, but it could mean people get to eat actual food instead of crap like wheat."

 

Really now that scenario might be better.

 

Actually your comments and those of Underling and others here. Make me look at the need for us to get back to doing some of the basics. In which case. In the sustainable cities scenario. You have people with city based Victory gardens, and green houses. With people growing things within the towns and cities. Rather than just leaving that up to rural areas. Though this is more so the case in rural and country parts.

 

Recommendations by the US DOE. Illustrates dividing a private property up into zones for such things as flowers and landscaping. Home gardening and an area for out door activities. And so, people will have to consider supplementing their food needs, in order to aid in the sustainability of society the world over. By having some small gardens on their city lots.

 

DrBubb

 

Hong Kong, I didn't know that. And if they eat that much beef I suspect they are going to have lots of colon cancer there. Hong Kong's scenario was created by being surrounded by China when Hong Kong was part of the British Empire. And so, they had no expansion outwards for farming. I seem to recal there was a fence surrounding Hong Kong. And so, we see that the people expanded out onto the water there. Living in boats. So I can understand what happened there.

 

Your comment made in these threads about people taking more of interest in these matters these days. Well is somewhat encouraging. I have seen that myself. But there is currently allot of misinformation being sent out over the International airwaves to the nations (I listen to shortwave). About governments wanting to overly control the lives of people. To the extent of wanting to put GPS radio tags on all farm animals. pets etc. Even keeping track of what crops people grow. But this is not the vision or recommendation of the US DOE on how to layout a sustainable community. Really now some people involved in supposedly providing truth over the airwaves, are in some areas only propagating misinformation. And their demon-ization of Climate Change and the controversy, as to whether it is happening or not. Clouds their understanding of how that we still have to reduce emission regardless of climate change ~ simply for environmental harmony and the prevention of the extension of species. And this in turn clouds their eyes from realizing that we need to move onto affordable renewable energy in order to sustain ourselves on this planet. As well as move onto sustainable economies, and sustainable communities and businesses. They allow the controversy to taint the overal subject of sustainability. Which irrespective of the controversy over global warming. Is just as important when we look at other matters such as oil, natural resources and our need to feed the world. And regardless of global warming, for reasons of removing toxins from the air and soils. And for the preservation of wild life and clean soils for farming. We still have to reduce emissions, as well as reduce our use of toxic chemicals in industry. And so, the controversy merely clouds these other issues which can not be ignored too long I suspect.

 

I realize that there are more problems than we can count; when we look ahead at what should be done. And so, the most logical first step. Is to invest in the most affordable things. And so, build our world up around the most affordable renewable energy technologies. And with better housing. And encourage the people to grow some of their own food. If nothing else but making it sound like a hobby. If we undertake to invest in the affordable, we take the sustainable route. And so, buy us some time, in hopes that time enables other technologies to become more affordable. Dr. Michio Kaku kind of gave us a vision of the amount of time it might take for solar electrical systems to become more affordable. Which his documentary placed at around 2050. But that was the earliest prognostication. We know how that scientist once prognosticated that by the first decade of the 21st Century we would have bases on the moon and be undertaking missions to Mars. But as we see now, technologically we are still a long ways from doing either.

 

Is Renewable Energy a "Good" Investment?

http://www.technologyreview.com/business/27000/

 

"Happy returns? Few companies lose money embracing renewable energy, but they don't make much either, according to an Environmental Leader survey of nearly 400 companies that have adopted solar, wind, and other renewable power sources. Credit: Mark McKie

 

The answer is still no. After all, many companies have pretty high standards for what is considered "good." In the world of corporate finance, it generally means a 20 to 25 percent annual return. "

 

roi_x582.jpg

 

 

"Energy return on investment (EROI) for wind energy."

(aka ICRT Investment Cost Recovery Time.)

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_retu...for_wind_energy

 

eroi_electric_power.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
has oil actually become any more expensive?

 

Gold-oil%20ratio.jpg

 

 

 

I hate to sound optimistic, but it could mean people get to eat actual food instead of crap like wheat.

 

LOL, love it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Energy return on investment (EROI) for wind energy."

 

I thought that this article on the Internet would help us to evaluate various technologies. But it is merely a biased commercial for wind power. But that is not unusual as we know. A sales pitch. And so, you can analyze the article and glean some counter points they admit to.

 

I was reading through this article about the method employed in evaluating technologies. First of all some data with regards to other technologies listed in the Figure 3. is errant. (Graphic seen at the end of my previous post.) I have US DOE Measurement and Verification data and UCLA analysis software that demonstrates the performance of an affordable technology; that out performs wind and solar per square foot area of the products. If you scale the technology I refer to up to the size of the large wind farm generators. The amount of energy harnessed will blow the wind generator away. (I am not referring to the wood gasifier, which in terms of size capacity will easily blow the large wind generators away.)

 

Also, this article refers to these large wind farm sized fan type wind generators as wind turbines. Which they are not. The Honeywell Wind Turbine WT6500 is a wind turbine. Which means that it comes with a wind tunnel forming ring around the wind generator blades. And so, can not be built in sizes as large as the wind farm wind generators. If it were it would have massive weight. Which means that wind turbines come only in residential sizes. And I suppose that this use of the term wind turbine is merely a lack of misplacing terminology. Or deliberate to misconstrue the Google search for wind turbines to land on wind generators instead. Since the Honeywell Wind Turbine is a better performer for the home owner.

 

Instead of analyzing the IRCT or Investment Cost Recovery Time of the technology, they are using this EROI analysis method for energy capacity. Naturally a large wind generator is going to generate allot of energy. More so than a residential wind or solar electrical system. And more so than the affordable kinds of technology I am looking at. Simply because of the large surface area and larger generator of wind farm sized wind generators. So this article is misleading in that it is biased towards wind power from the get go. Though it appears to be comparing other technologies with wind. Next of all, they tell you that they committed a study of wind power technologies, rather than a study of other technologies. And so, I am thinking that some of their graphical data was opinion or borrowed and hence was not studied by them at all. Which leads to publishing misinformation that is commercial in nature. Which means that it makes their chosen technology look good. And so, is a sales pitch. But this does not surprise investors I know. Sales pitches are always biased towards the paradigm of the salesmen.

 

The matter is the affordability not the power generation capacity or density. However it can be demonstrated that contrary to figure 3 of the article. That there is a technology that can out perform the wind generator size for size.

 

Of course the article is biased for wind energy. But then goes into a bunch of complicated and problematic scenarios that come with the investment. Of which I am already aware of.

 

In the article you read this: "The PTC provides a 1.9 cent-per-kilowatt-hour (kWh) tax credit for electricity generated with wind turbines over the first ten years of a project’s operations, and is a critical factor in financing new wind farms. The inconsistent nature of this tax credit has been a significant challenge for the wind industry, creating uncertainty for long-term planning and preventing faster market development." Which is to say that wind energy has to be assisted by government subsidies. In order to help the power company to have an edge towards some kind of profit. Which they can not afford to have without government assistance. And so without the tax incentive, they consider this a "challenge for the wind industry, creating uncertainty for long-term planning and preventing faster market development."

 

Here in the words of the article, however is the matter of why recovery cost in the lifetime of the equipment and it's installation can compute to be a poor investment. ~ "The uncontrolled, intermittent nature of wind reduces its value relative to operator-controlled resources such as coal, gas, or nuclear generation. Intermittency impacts include the seasonal and diurnal match or mis-match to regional energy demands; the contribution of wind energy to capacity reserves for meeting regional reliability requirements; and the lost value to wind plant owners in surplus generation that occurs when wind power saturates the flexible dispatch portion of grid operations.

 

Wind energy also affects the overall reliability of the electric power system, which is represented in part by the system reserve margin — that is, a margin of total installed capacity above projected peak load. The capacity credit of an isolated wind plant is generally equal to its capacity factor during the system’s peak load period, which normally is less than an operator-controlled source. As more wind capacity is added to a system within a finite geographic area, it becomes increasingly likely that an “outage” at any given facility will be temporally correlated with an “outage” at a nearby (or even not-so nearby) plant. This tends to reduce the average capacity credit for a wind plant as more such facilities are added in a region."

 

At times it generates less than ideal energy. And then at other times it generates more that is being used on the grid, in which no one is using and paying for it then.

 

Given all of the problems with the wind investment scenario (except for more reasonable and higher performing residential sized wind turbine technologies ~ such as the nice and moderately affordable Honeywell Wind Turbine WT6500). If you were to analyze the investment in terms of Investment Cost Recovery Time within the rated lifetime of the technology. It does not compute to be a wise investment. And so, it has to be subsidized by tax incentives to help invite power companies to invest into wind. So this all comes out of the analysis of the article, which is as we can see. Was meant to promote wind power. Yet they do spill the beans in their own words. When you read between the lines analyzing the many problems that come with the investment.

 

In all cases with renewable energy technologies, it will be that you have to compute the ICRT or Investment Cost Recovery Time which does take into account the energy generation capacity of the product over it's rated lifetime. Via taking the annual average kW generation of the product, times it's rated lifetime. And then compute that times the local cost of the kilo watt hour. To see whether or not the technology is going to generate enough energy to pay for itself in it's rated life time. If it does not, or just barely breaks even then there is no profit in it. Sometimes you have to compute more years past the rated lifetime to recover the initial investment cost. And so, that is not a sustainable investment.

 

ICRT = annual kW generated x product rated lifetime x local power grid cost of the kW/hour = +/- IC

 

Where IC = initial investment cost

 

The above equation is the investor's equation.

post-5059-1295639389_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now there is a select kind of renewable energy technology that I have found is more affordable and more capable of producing a substantial amount of energy than wind or solar electrical systems.

 

I think I know what this is. I found out about it last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply SCP and the time you have obviously put into responding. I appreciate and will follow up on your links and hopefully learn more about the technology over the weekend. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I know what this is. I found out about it last year.

 

Can someone help point the more clueless of us in the correct direction?

 

Never knew about syngas production from gasification, was interesting to read up on it. I wonder what we'd use as a fuel if it became popular, there's not enough waste nut shells or corn husks for national scale production surely? Large scale logging?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How To Implement Renewable Energy In The Private Sector...

 

Lets actually do an analysis and comparision. Based upon some actual software plots.

 

All of this is in the zip file I upload with this post.

 

I want to show you something. And so, want to show you some simple math computations. Using software models and their plots. To demonstrate an analysis of renewable energy input for your awareness. To which when you consider the levels of energy computed. This should blow you away. ~ Since no one seems to be marketing truth to us these days. You know how people are marketing their products, and are in competition with other products. Which is only natural, you know how it is. Stretching the merits and truth in their advertising. Thats how sales pitches go sometimes.

 

The main file is a HTML document. Which details the analysis. Snap shots of the software plots are included. The math is simple, you can do it yourself. And so, prove something to yourself. And so, I compare the simple technology to a Thin Film technology solar electrical panel. And a large scale wind farm sized wind generator. Of which that model is massive and unrealistic. But size for size comparison is important to realize the energy involved.

 

There are two models. One of the models is conventional sized. The other is the massive one to compare to the wind generator.

 

And keep in mind that this out performs wind and solar electrical systems in affordability. It out performs residential sized wind and solar electrical systems in energy harnessing capacity.

 

Once you do a little research on how cost effective this technology is to manufacture. Then it becomes very attractive as an investment. And can do allot of good in terms of our energy scheme, which you will see in the energy computation. Of course ome will downplay it's merits. But compare it to other technologies and their cost. Remember that the greatest home energy demand is for winter time heating. And so, we want to consider addressing the greatest year round home energy demand in the private sector.

 

~ Clean, no emissions or chemicals. And a dramatic impact on our energy usage.

How_To_Implement_Renwable_Energy_In_The_Privte_Sector.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can someone help point the more clueless of us in the correct direction?

 

Never knew about syngas production from gasification, was interesting to read up on it. I wonder what we'd use as a fuel if it became popular, there's not enough waste nut shells or corn husks for national scale production surely? Large scale logging?

 

Saw mills will and do want to rid themselves of wood chips and saw dust. The saw dust is used to make wood pellets for gasifiers. Also home owners can use bags of pine bark and cedar chips. And then there is the refuse of agriculture. Large farms can burn this for their own energy needs. In which a farm can stock the biproduct for up to a years worth of single farm use. The thing is, I am not looking at a scenario where the home owner is into producing all of their electricity from a gasifier. Only when they need to boost the battery bank to a modest and more affordable scaled down solar / wind electrical system. And to occaisonally charge up their hybrid electric automobile.

 

Given enough power capability. You can run a gasifier power plant about 4 to 6 hours to charge up a battery bank. That can supply an energy efficient home with electrical power for several days. Just for a few hours of charge. This then would mean that the use of the gasifier is not intensive. And if you alos have wind and solar electricity for the battery bank. You might negate charging the batteries when there has been enough wind and sun. But I also am thinking that such homes are also running off the local power grid. So your choice to make some electricity is dependant upon if you have the time and feel like doing it. But if the power grid goes down. Then you have energy security in that you can produce and store more power than you can use in one days time. Providing we have an energy efficient home with a low energy demand. Which means that our renewable energy systems requirement is smaller; as a more modest investment. The conventional old school home would require a larger renewable energy system which would be expensive. And so, un-affordable for most people.

 

If it happened that we had a national or global economic crisis due to oil or some other scenario. No one would be going to work. So you'd be home. And have time to produce energy. And can have energy to run your tractor and do some farming. Of course no one wants it to come to such a scenario.

 

As far as farming of wood goes. We have already mastered the management of wood farming. We know which species of trees that can grow fast, and be large enough in 5 years to harvest. And so, we plant this year, and some next year. And rotate the crops, replanting what we harvest each year. Today there are houses being built all around the world. Some housing projects, and appartment buildings are being built today, with wood crops that the world has learned to wisely manage.

 

Now we do have to increase the energy efficiency of our buildings. So that their energy demand is less than that of buildings that have been built in the past. And so, increasing the efficiency reduces the energy demand. Hence the demand on resources being reduced helps us to curb exploitation of the natural resources. Which are renewable if wisely managed. Trees are a renewable resource. So long as we continue to manage them and not deplete them.

 

Europe just about cut down every tree in Europe in the days of wooden ships. Around the time of Columbus. From this they learned the lesson of forestry management.

 

Now we do have to fill in the gaps here and there with wind and solar farms. And so, just like my scenario of using residential wind and solar electrical systems to fill in the gaps between using a bio mass gasifier at home. And then there are other technologies we can use to fill in some other gaps. Providing that we know to use the most affordable renewable energy systems with the best investment cost, and impact. And another way we fill in the gaps is via energy efficient home construction. And hybrid electric automobiles who's combustion engine portion uses natural gas. And so using the most efficient automotive technology with natural gas means we are conserving the resource. Which we would not be doing if we used V8 combustion engines with natural gas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as farming of wood goes. We have already mastered the management of wood farming. We know which species of trees that can grow fast, and be large enough in 5 years to harvest. And so, we plant this year, and some next year. And rotate the crops, replanting what we harvest each year. Today there are houses being built all around the world. Some housing projects, and appartment buildings are being built today, with wood crops that the world has learned to wisely manage.

Where can I learn more about this? 'Wood farming'- I like the idea. Is wood from 5 year old trees good enough for building? What about for solid fuel? Or charcoal? Very interesting stuff in your posts btw. I do wonder if the whole idea scales up for our present world. Probably not. But it helps. I have a densely wooded largely unused mountain and I'd benefit from studying all about it by the sounds of things. It could be my future livelihood I guess.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing Private Sector Investments

 

I want to look at our example investments here. Comparing the best residential wind electrical system the Honeywell Wind Turbine WT6500 3 kW grid tie system and the 1.5 kW single turbine system to our study of the solar heating panel.

 

The 3 kW 3 turbine system is rated:

2752 kW/yr

 

The 1 kW 1 turbine system is rated:

1500 kW/yr

 

On the other hand we can see that a 4 x 8 solar panel before losses is rated at:

 

51,640 Btu = 15,130.52 watts = 15.13 kW per 9 hour solar day in December.

 

Which means that we have the following potential for the 31 days of December:

 

51640 Btu * 31 days = 1.60084e+6 Btu = 1.6 mega Btu

 

Which is 4.6904612e+5 watts = 469046.12 watts = 469.046 kW

 

Now these computations are relative to my location on 36.87 degrees latitude.

 

This tells us that over the winter heating season. If we compute the months of October, November, December, January, Febuary and March. With these six months we will have racked up nearly the same amount of energy that the 3 turbine 3 kW wind turbine systems is rated for annually.

 

Now add in also that the amount of solar heating panels that we might have on a home may be as many as 4. So our December energy potential with 4 will be 1876.184 kW. Which easily surpasses the 3 kW wind turbine system's annual kW generation in just 2 winter months.

 

Investment wise, 4 panels compared to the wind turbine system. Is more cost effective and so, outperforms wind and solar electrical systems.

 

In our analysis in the HTML file, we saw that even for a system that was 50% efficient. The amount of energy capacity was still impressive.

http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....ost&id=1531

 

If we implement this kind of renewable energy first of all. We will cover the private sector's greatest year round home energy demand. In an affordable way, which is affordable for investors to invest in in terms of a manufacturing venture. Which in turn means low cost technology for the home owner.

 

In the comparison of a 60' * 60' massive panel to a large wind far sized wind generator. The thought of such a thing was unrealistic. However in the construction of a large appartment complex building or a Federal Housing Project with multiply appartment buildings. If we use 113 (4' * 8') solar heating panels then we will have a little over the energy input of the 60' * 60' massive panel. Which in our example input 1.466 mega W over the course of the 9 hour solar day of a typical December day.

 

Now there is also the green merits and credits of the technology in terms of manufacturing. Low cost materials that will not result in allot of industrial waste. And so, uses low amounts of energy to manufacture. And the user does not have any emission or chemicals as side products of the technology. Which happens to lower their homes emissions signature. And racks up some cost savings sooner than other technologies can. All in all we are looking at the cleanest form of renewable energy in terms of both manufacturing and private sector use. Hence this should be the one technology with the highest green merits and credits. No batteries required.

 

I could go into details about a green energy efficient prototype home I have been working on. That uses 4 panels. Which I have also added wind and solar electrical systems too. Which can also have a 10 kW gasifier power plant added.

 

But merely using the solar heating panels alone. And no other renewable energy technology. The energy cost to operate the home. Is such that the home helps to pay for itself. You will never have the monthly energy bills coming about in times of high fuel prices, to come to compete with the monthly home loan payments. And so, the owner would not default on the home.

 

Now this one scenario can help to fuel the home construction as well as Federal Housing Projects industry. And provide manufacturing jobs since the technology can provide the investor a good profit in return. And help the people to save money each month that is in turn returned to the local economy. So this scenario will help to fuel the green economy in a sustainable market way. Helping other businesses in the community to realize an increase in commerce. Which is the result of cost savings that the home owners realize every month. So the the matter starts to stack up as a most desirable way for us to turn towards providing people with realistic and affordable answers. And one that is not going to come with some unwanted environmental waste biproducts in the communities that invest into this technology.

 

Reconsidering the large 60' * 60' solar heating panel model. Consider 1000 homes using from 2 to 4 ~ 4' * 8' panels. Now we have a scenario that competes with the energy harnessing capability of a most wind generator farm. But cost much less to emplement.

 

Also many existing homes can install these panels. So we can retrofit many existing buildings. And this technology has been used with mobile homes too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where can I learn more about this? 'Wood farming'- I like the idea. Is wood from 5 year old trees good enough for building? What about for solid fuel? Or charcoal? Very interesting stuff in your posts btw. I do wonder if the whole idea scales up for our present world. Probably not. But it helps. I have a densely wooded largely unused mountain and I'd benefit from studying all about it by the sounds of things. It could be my future livelihood I guess.

 

Jake your answers can most all be found here: http://www.gekgasifier.com/forums/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

List Prices For ICRT Calculations

 

Here is a site that has some good prices on 4' x 8' solar heating panels:

 

http://www.lakotasolarenterprises.com/

 

$850.00 which as you can see is not a bad price for the amount of energy that these things can harness. Competition in the future can bring these prices down some.

 

You can use this to compute the ICRT or Investment Cost Recovery Time of the investment. And so, compare this to other technologies.

 

I am interested in investors considering a venture to manufacture these panels. Since competition will help to lower their cost. $600 seems more like what they should retail for. Knowing how that they are constructed. And so, just do a little research of the technology. Find out how it is constructed. Also there are kits that one can obtain to build these at home. So kits are another venture. And there is solar Btu software that computes the performance of the panel at each users site around the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

List Prices For ICRT Calculations

 

Here is a site that has some good prices on 4' x 8' solar heating panels:

 

http://www.lakotasolarenterprises.com/

 

$850.00 which as you can see is not a bad price for the amount of energy that these things can harness. Competition in the future can bring these prices down some.

 

You can use this to compute the ICRT or Investment Cost Recovery Time of the investment. And so, compare this to other technologies.

 

I am interested in investors considering a venture to manufacture these panels. Since competition will help to lower their cost. $600 seems more like what they should retail for. Knowing how that they are constructed. And so, just do a little research of the technology. Find out how it is constructed. Also there are kits that one can obtain to build these at home. So kits are another venture. And there is solar Btu software that computes the performance of the panel at each users site around the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×