Supplemental Plan To The Pickens Plan - It's time to power up this movement!

Add a Comment

Comment by Todd McKissick on October 31, 2008 at 6:12am

Neil,
Great post. Seeing the link between poor legislation and end result is a big leap in our collective awareness. Most people don't get that.

I can't speak directly to Vonage, but I would assume it's similar to the cheaper (and better in my book) Packet 8 service. I pay $24 for unlimited calls tween here and Canada and all it takes is a sandwich sized box hooked to Ethernet. With that in place, I find it very convenient to put my 'puter all the way into hibernate mode where it saves everything and shuts completely down. When I get back on, it only needs to put everything back into memory that was there before. I also have a TV card in it so I can watch TV (plus Tivo functions) on the screen either in a window or full screen like a movie. (I do have to remember to not hibernate when I have a recording set though) On top of that, the USB ports charge a couple of our cell phones too so they don't use any power when it's unplugged. So all told, with this setup, I have a TV, Tivo, DVD player, home theater, multimedia server, cable box, phone charger, stereo, radio, computer, scanner, copier, printer, fax, photo printer, house phone server and 4 handset house phone base all running from about 300 watts in one location. When I put it to sleep, all but the house phone stuff gets shut completely off. I figure that cuts about 500 or more watts from my former setup. Now if I could just do this in the living room! When this type of setup becomes the norm, we could see 50% of homes dropping quite a bit of juice. I heard of one company that wants to make a webcam autonimously take a single frame picture every few seconds to compare for use as a motion detector. This can allow all these devices to go to sleep seconds after you leave the room and come back on automatically.

I've become completely discouraged by CFLs. When they first came out, I put 6 in my bathroom. Since then I have replaced every bulb at least 3 times each. I now number and date each bulb when I install it to keep track! The same thing has happened except for two that rarely get used. I'm tired of spending $4 to replace a bulb that lasts 1/2 as long as the old ones. I'll wait for the LEDs to make sense and buy them only once. I think many people have had this same experience. When LEDs become the norm, we'll see another huge cut in power use.

Your christmas light tales display yet another opportunity for reduction, possibly the biggest. If we look into the future when all christmas lights were LEDs, we might notice that they're all low voltage DC powered. With this compatibility, we cut out the multiple (equalling cheap which equals inefficient) AC to DC power supplies, and get more light from our power (DC lights don't blink or flicker) It becomes easier and cheaper to make elaborate flashing and chasing light sequences which mean each light will be on less total time. Not only that, but the result of standardizing this low voltage and simple controlling system will allow it to migrate to our other devices. We can then literally run everything in the home (except larger motors, older TVs and electric stoves) from this same type of efficient and feature-rich system. Remember, everything in your computer runs on DC which is now inefficiently converted from AC at about 70% or less.

When you take an inventory of your home with these possibilities in mind, you'll find that your electric use (not HVAC or cooking) can go from an overall daily "average" now of 1200 W to less than 200 watts. You can almost get that now from the smallest PV or wind systems. We just have to quit listening to how THEY want us to do things.

Comment by neil cox on October 30, 2008 at 7:14pm

Todd's last 7 sentences illustrate that government rarely does anything well. Sleep mode worked until I got a magic Jack. Now my desk top is on 24/7 for an average of one incoming call per day. I presume Vontage also requires the the computer to be on. I do however turn off the monitor when I don't expect to compute for an hour or more.
Having a motion detector turn lights off and on 100 times per day (we have pets) will save electricity, but sharply reduces the life of incandescent bulbs, CFL = compact fluorescent lights and old style TVs, computer monitors and fluorescent lights. The new stuff, such as LEDs may tolerate a million on off cycles. When we change our ten power cubes, we leave plugged in to switching power supplies, we will halve the 6 watts, the power cubes use, on the average, to 3 watts, unless we plug in more of them which seems likely as we have been adding them about one per year. The three watt LEDs will be a big improvement over the ten watt CFL, but less light means more of them, if they ever get cheap enough for poor folks to afford. I bought ($11 at Walmart) a sting of 70 LED Christmas stars about one inch between points, but all 70 do not quite equal the light of one 40 watt incandescent bulb, even though they use 7.2 watts total according to the box. The $6 string of 25 white crystal lights (2.4 watts) are a bit less efficient = about 100 to equal a 40 watt incandesent. Each LED is 20 ma at 5 volts. The stars are 30 ma at 3.5 volts and produce slightly more light. Both kinds claim 25,000 hours life. Neil

Comment by Todd McKissick on October 21, 2008 at 7:02am

Neil, I'll have to go back over some of your other recommendations on the last page when I get a chance, but regarding the coal and oil based electricity, here's my thinking.

First, on the leaving it out part, I intentionally left it out because I don't see it a necessary part of the plan. As you may have noticed, I have not placed any time frame or deadline on this plan. It is simple a goal to work towards. If we get 50% there in a certain number of years, that's irrelevant. The more important part is to keep progressing on all parts that we agree will be needed. If one line shows a higher percent than someone believes should be there, the most likely scenerio is that they need a little more research in that area because short term breakthroughs are on the way.

Regarding the 'decommissioning' of coal plants, it's more practical to restructure them towards other energy sources. They have the land and surrounding infrastructure so why not just replace the actual boiler or even modify it?

Regarding the estimate of needing double what we now need, I don't see that as either likely or possible. Our home electronics devices are consolidating functions into mobile, chargable and efficient devices. Every energy using device is being looked at with a fine tooth comb. Energy star ratings for computer sleep modes will become the norm for most devices. The parasitic loads will ease off by some high percentage and the convenience loads, like leaving the lights on when not in the room, will be only for those who chose not to buy a smart module or one of the new waves of smart motion sensors. TVs and other high use appliances like refrigerators will no longer displace the old inefficient one to the garage when a new one is purchased. This practice alone has deferred a very large chunk of the efficiency gains we should have been seeing for the last decade. I know of 4 garages out of 6 people with one, that have both a fridge and TV in the garage.

Comment by neil cox on October 20, 2008 at 4:24pm

I realized later that you did not include any coal or petroleum electricity. Perhaps 40% coal and 1% petroleum is realistic by 2018. We can not reasonably expect to decommission coal electric plants presently under construction by 2018, or even 2025
That should not invalidate your spread sheet, as a booming ecconomy could need double our present energy need by 2018 or 2025. Neil

Comment by neil cox on October 17, 2008 at 11:43pm

Domestic Renewable Energy Plan ~For 2018~ ~My coments are enclosed with a~
Supplemented by:
12% Natural Gas ~desirable, but will produce opposition from the powerful natural gas industry. Near term I suggest we think 22%. The NG industry is likely capable of 25% though 2018 without imports~
29% Oil

Electrical ------------------------------ 176.5%
Large Wind farms ------------------------ 18.0%
Single Large Wind Turbines -------------- 1.5%
Remote small/med Wind ------------------- 0.5%
>>>>>Wind Subtotal ---------------------- 20.0%
Large PV projects, remote --------------- 1.0%
Distributed PV, grid tied, no storage --- 2.5%
Dist. PV, off grid ---------------------- 0.4%
Dist. PV,grid tied w/storage ------------ 0.1%
>>>>PV Subtotal ------------------------- 4.0%
Large CSP Solar plants ------------------ 12.0% ~That would require the manufacture of about one million times one million square meters of heliostats. I don't think we have built the first million square meters 1960 though 2008, world wide. Hopefully most of the 999,000,000,000 square meters of heliostats = steerable mirrors would be built in the USA by 2025 perhaps?~
Large CSP solar w/storage --------------- 4.0% ~which storage method are you thinking?~
Dist. Comm scale CHCP w/storage --------- 15.0% ~similar to the problem with CSP, more than 1000 times scale up of production is needed in the USA. Perhaps by 2025~
Dist Solar Thermal, DHW & solar cooling - 13.0%
Dist. Solar Thermal, CHCP w/storage ----- 20.0% ~ I don't think there are presently enough favorable solar locations. We should not destroy billions of trees to remove shade from roof tops. Many roofs, not presently shaded by trees, will be heavily shaded by 2018) New construction in our deserts could add 3% by 2025~
>>>>Solar Thermal subtotal -------------- 64.0%
Hydro (current) ------------------------- 9.0%
Biomass --------------------------------- 3.0%
Natural Gas Backup ---------------------- 5.0% ~we will get opposition from the profitable gas turbine industry if we cut back that much~
Vehicle-2-Grid Storage contribution ---- 5.0% ~ how do we compensate the vehicle owner for the possibility that his vehicle will only be half charged, if he wants to use it on short notice? My guess is 1% is more realistic.~
Geothermal, large scale ----------------- 3.0%
Ocean, OTEC ----------------------------- 1.0%
Ocean, Tidal ---------------------------- 2.0%
Nuclear --------------------------------- 20.0% ~that is just replacement. I agree we should only build enough nukes so we don't forget how to build them.~
Natural Gas (for grid stability) -------- 10.0% ~How is this different from the 5% about ten lines above?
>>>>>Other subtotal --------------------- 58.0%
Conservation ---------------------------- 7.0%
Electrical efficiency (appliance based) - 2.5%
Electrical conceptual efficiencies ------ 11.0% ~ dc at several voltages may be practical for new homes, but not retrofit. What else do you have in mind?~
Gains from grid conservation ------------ 10.0%
>>>>Electrical Reductions subtotal ------ 24.0% ~ I'll guess 10% is more realistic by 2018~

Vehicular Transportation ---------------- 127.1%
BEV (light duty) ------------------------ 12.0%
HEV (light duty) ------------------------ 2.6%
PHEV (light duty) ----------------------- 6.9%
V2G (light duty) ------------------------ 9.2% ~ how is this different from the 5% about 24 lines above?~
>>>>Vehicle Subtotal ------------------------ 30.7%
Rapid Transit (rail, large) ------------- 6.0% ~ the systems built in USA since 1990 have been too costly per passenger mile, with rare exceptions, perhaps due to massive corruption. Big is usually bad.~
Rapid Transit (Maglev, personal) -------- 18.0% ~I'll guess 3% by 2018, almost none have been built to date, and customer acceptance has been poor so far, with rare exceptions. Even the free people mover at Magic Kingdom, Orlando rarely has a waiting time, admittedly not rapid.~
>>>>Mass Transit subtotal ------------------- 24.0%
Algae based Diesel (heavy) -------------- 10.0%
Algae based Gasoline (mixed) ------------ 6.7%
Ethanol, existing ----------------------- 5.0% ~that is 5% of the vehicle fuel, not 5% of the USA energy budget, I think~
Ethanol, cellulosic --------------------- 12.0%
Biodiesel, WVO -------------------------- 0.5%
Biodiesel, Experimental ----------------- 0.2% ~that could reach 5% by 2018
>>>>>Bio Subtotal ---------------------------- 34.4%
CNG, including conversions -------------- 18.0%
Legacy vehicles on oil ------------------ 20.0%

Air Transportation ---------------------- 100.0%
Transferred from Excess Automotive ------ 9.1%
Algae based LL100 (Private aviation) ---- 10.0%
Algae based Jet-A (Private aviation) ---- 0.5%
Algae based Jet-A (Commercial) ---------- 13.0%
Legacy planes on oil -------------------- 67.4%

Rail Transportation --------------------- 100.0%
Transferred from Excess Automotive ------ 18.0% ~18% is more than 75% of our present automobile miles, by 2025 perhaps~
Reduction from conservation ------------- 11.0%
Reduction in coal/oil transport --------- 51.0% ~How did we reduce the energy used to transport coal by more than a few percent?~
Legacy rail on oil ---------------------- 20.0%

Remember, there's more information in the actual spreadsheet like how it puts over 2 million people to work or how using 80% of the Waste Vegetable Oil only contributes 0.5% to the mix. Also, my assumptions were that an external expense gets charged to that which benefits the most.

Glossary of Terms
BEV---------Battery Electric Vehicle
CHCP-------Combined Heat, Cooling and Power
CNG---------Compressed Natural Gas
Comm------Commercial
CSP---------Concentrated Solar Power (Electricity from solar thermal)
DHW--------Domestic Hot Water
Dist.---------Distributed
HEV---------Hybrid Electric Vehicle
Hydro-------Hydroelectric Generation (dams, run of river)
JET-A-------Aviation jet fuel
LL100-------Light aviation fuel
Maglev------Magnetic Levitation (frictionless support system)
OTEC-------Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion
PHEV-------Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicle
PV------------Photovoltaic Cell Panels
V2G----------Vehicle To Grid (PHEV used as short term grid storage)
WVO--------Waste Vegetable Oil (commercial) ~Maybe 1% if we can get meals at home to put the fat and oil in someones' fuel tank. The animal fat would have to be rendered = not likely Neil~

Comment by Todd McKissick on October 17, 2008 at 7:54am

Great comment, Neil. Thanks. I've hopefully corrected that now by adding the Glossary of Terms.

Since "Dist" is distributed, the answer to your question is that it referrs to a single site, residence or business.

LOL = Laugh Out Loud, as in I got a kick out of you adding ASAP and IMHO. ;)

Comment by neil cox on October 17, 2008 at 5:55am

You should not assume people know what the initials mean. PV = photo voltaic solar cells
Dist. PV = district? photo voltaic. Is a district a million electric customers, one large state , several small states. Perhaps a few blocks is a district.
CPS ? CHCP ? DHW ? Backup natural gas = Peak demand gas turbines which also serve as back up and sometimes baseline.
Vehicle-2-grid storage contribution? OTEC = Ocean thermal energy C? = Very large water vapor turbines that use 80 plus degrees F surface water to make the vapor. and 40 degrees f ocean bottom water to condense the vapor at the output of the turbine.
BEV = battery electric vehicle HEV = gasoline electric vehicle PHEV = propane hybrid electric vehicle V2G = duel fuel vehicle? WVO ? CNG = compressed natural gas
Legacy vehicles on oil = any mono fuel vehicle that uses fossil oil or gasoline, not including propane, butane, LPG = liquid petroleum gas, etc? ASAP = as soon as possible, NG = natural gas IMHO = in my humble opinion.
I thought over 100% was reasonable as we will need more energy for some purposes in the future. Neil

Comment by Lou De Frog on October 10, 2008 at 7:59pm

Without financing you can do nothing. If Governments loaned interest free money to communities to build energy producing systems, the Government would not be going into debt and the communities would sell their energy to repay the loan. Because financing is interest free the communities could undercut the price of conventional energy and the transition to alternate energy would happen real fast.

More weired ideas on my blog thingy.

Comment by Todd McKissick on August 18, 2008 at 5:36am

Hi Larry,

Unfortunately, the trains are already electric and being charged from onboard diesels, running on stored fuel. In terms of miles per gallon for each ton carried, they get over 400 mpg now! That means that the only way to get them much more efficient is to remove the fuel load (the weight of the diesel fuel - of which batteries are heavier) and to generate the electricity from more efficient means. The diesels are dirty and only get about 35% efficiency, but surely for the time being, the grid electricity isn't much better. The storing and using of power from batteries would also incur a small loss. On top of that, reconfiguring track elevations is extremely expensive due to the quality and compaction required. So overall, it's not quite going to be better.... yet. Does it have merit? Absolutely. It just needs other infrastructure in place first.

Another idea I like is to break up the 'loads' into small pieces and send them directly door-to-door. This new lighter load can then be sent along a single rail hanging suspended from poles like we already use for utilities. This eliminates all the ground work like roads, rail, safety zones, interchanges, accidents and delaying crossings. A great proposal for this is at http://www.unimodal.net/index.php that shows how it can replace significant portions of commuter traffic. Other cars can be built that hold a single pallet for transport. It's then easy to extend the coverage to the next town and you've got the most efficient and cleanest means to transfer both cargo and people. Unfortunately, since it's labeled a form of mass transit, most people won't dig into the details to find all the benefits.

I placed a small one of these in the proposal above, but I don't expect it to truly benefit us until multiple cities are connected. I can only hope to see that in my lifetime.

Comment by Larry Smith on August 18, 2008 at 3:57am

Hey Todd,

Not sure I understood where your spreadsheet is going, so I am going to comment on one aspect. I would probably persue what I am about to suggest, however I don't have the reserves. I am working on a few other things where I should be able to accomplish on my limited income. Once again I give away a hugely potential business :::chuckle::: Maybe this can work as a provential pat.?

Lets look at trains. More and more, cities are going to electric trains for mass transportation in cities. Not a bad idea on the surface, however it does take from the grid, which is more than likely fed by coal or natural gas. So I took a look at freight trains and amtrak. How can we make these less of fuel hogs. In a nut shell, they should be electric.

If all the wheels on train cars was to be converted, could even afford to add a couple wheels to each car and retro fit them with something like these http://www.e-traction.com/TheWheel.htm, hell a train could even have 1 car dedicated to nothing but batteries if needed. Now, the way I see it, every one of those wheels could get the monsters moving, then once speed is achieved, most of them would then become a power provider to charge batteries and run engine car/s to keep at speed. Would it work in the mountain ranges? Not sure, I am not an electrical engineer, up would be problem, down, even the engine would be producing electricity to the batteries.

What would it cost train yard to modify yard so when a train comes to a stop in it's yard, would be on a slight slope to help with getting them moving a bit more effiecently as well. Wonder what that would save just with these big diesel monsters.

Knowledge is good, however for me, to much information confuses cause I want to solve all at once lol

Larry

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last