The Briefing Room
General Category => Science, Technology and Knowledge => Energy => Topic started by: mystery-ak on May 20, 2021, 11:01:10 pm
-
Biden administration takes first step toward light bulb efficiency standard
By Rachel Frazin - 05/20/21 06:08 PM EDT
The Biden administration is taking the first step necessary to instate an energy efficiency standard for light bulbs, a move that’s expected to undermine incandescent bulbs in favor of LEDs.
On Thursday, the Energy Department issued a pre-publication version of what’s known as a request for information asking stakeholders to weigh in on reinstating the standard.
Specifically, it asks for details like how long it will take stores to sell through their bulb inventories and what industry needs to do to avoid “stranded” inventory.
Supporters of reinstating the standards argue the move reduce greenhouse gas emissions with less energy being used, as well as save consumers money on their electricity bills.
“We’re unnecessarily wasting a lot of energy and costing consumers a lot of money on their utility bills by every month that this is delayed,” said Noah Horowitz, director of the Center for Energy Efficiency Standards at the Natural Resource Defense Council.
In 2019, the Trump administration determined that it did not need to instate the updated standard for incandescent light bulbs.
more
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/554661-biden-administration-takes-step-toward-instating-lightbulb
-
There's a string of incandescent 100w bulbs under my house. There's two more down in the well house.
When the temp in either place gets too low (40, I believe) a little red LED comes on in my house, That's my cue to go turn those lights on.
How the hell do I do that with LEDs? And I am by no means alone here in the Great White North.
-
Incandescent bulbs are already 100% efficient. Five percent of the energy goes towards lighting your house and the other 95% goes towards heating it.
-
Incandescent bulbs are already 100% efficient. Five percent of the energy goes towards lighting your house and the other 95% goes towards heating it.
That ain't necessarily a bad thing in some places... Here being one of them.
-
Ok, so this just verifies once again that Joe is a complete idiot.
-
There's a string of incandescent 100w bulbs under my house. There's two more down in the well house.
When the temp in either place gets too low (40, I believe) a little red LED comes on in my house, That's my cue to go turn those lights on.
How the hell do I do that with LEDs? And I am by no means alone here in the Great White North.
Right. It isn't always about illumination, sometimes the "waste heat" is the objective, and the light is the byproduct.
I ever thought it idiotic to assume the heat was wasted at this latitude. With 16 hours of daylight in the warm months, people don't use the lights that much, and in winter, when there are 16 hours per day of darkness (and subzero temps) no heat is wasted. :pondering:
-
Considering I was my little sister's Easy Bake Oven lab rat, I wonder what culinary wonders I might have been deprived of had there been no incandescent bulbs... :whistle: :silly:
-
Considering I was my little sister's Easy Bake Oven lab rat, I wonder what culinary wonders I might have been deprived of had there been no incandescent bulbs... :whistle: :silly:
HA! I was likewise appointed. I heard that! :silly:
-
HA! I was likewise appointed. I heard that! :silly:
:beer:
-
Since all the LEDs are made in China, when the ChiComs declare war with us, we can sit in the dark.
-
Since all the LEDs are made in China, when the ChiComs declare war with us, we can sit in the dark.
Which bulbs go first in an EMP?
-
Which bulbs go first in an EMP?
None of them. The electrical distribution system goes first.......
-
None of them. The electrical distribution system goes first.......
It's okay, I have enough bulbs, it'll be putting out the current to feed them that will be a challenge.
-
There's a string of incandescent 100w bulbs under my house. There's two more down in the well house.
When the temp in either place gets too low (40, I believe) a little red LED comes on in my house, That's my cue to go turn those lights on.
How the hell do I do that with LEDs? And I am by no means alone here in the Great White North.
(https://www.processheating.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Cone-Heater-002.jpg)
-
bele wrote:
"Ok, so this just verifies once again that Joe is a complete idiot."
C'mon, man!
You know that he didn't have 1% of the input into making this decision.
He may not even KNOW about it...
-
Dim bulbs writing standards for light bulbs?
What could possibly go wrong?
-
(https://www.processheating.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Cone-Heater-002.jpg)
WTF???
-
Weren't we already put through this during the Obama admin?
Since affordable 2700K (soft white) LED bulbs became available in standard sizes (A15/17/19) and standard bases (E26), why would I want to use incadescent bulbs?
Around this way we're paying $0.12/13 per kWH generation and $0.12/13 per kWH transmission for electricity.
They've shuddered most of the coal plants. They've shutdown a couple nuclear plants (Yankee Rowe, Pilgrim). They won't build or expand the natural gas plants nor pipelines. They've been trying to shove Cape Wind (offshore Nantucket Sound windmills) down our throats for the past 15 years. The state and feds have been subsidizing solar and onshore wind. They won't allow construction of local hydro-electric, so we are going to pay through the nose to get more Quebec Hydro via the New England Clean Energy Connect that Central Maine Power/Avangrid is building through Western Maine.
The Federal Energy Commission has been concerned that Massachusetts is too dependent on a single source of generation - pipeline natural gas - while not building new or expanding exisiting natural pipeline nor LNG. Our electric companies can't even build more intra-state transmission capacity because of town NIMBY's. If we have a long cold spell in Winter, Massachusetts utility customers may have shortages of natural gas heat AND electricity. The moonbats won't even allow for the custruction of new/additional pipeline capacity for to pipe in Marcelleus and Utica fracked shale gas from next door (New York, Pennsylvania). It's nuts. The moonbats are making working people pay more for gas and electricity, risk more shortages, and make the state more economically non-competitive for employers and residents - all so they can feel good about themselves as they have wine, cheese, and lobster at their summer mansions on Nantucket and the Vineyard.
In 2013, when Solar City (now Tesla) came around offering non-money out-of-pocket rooftop solar leaseback, I jumped at the chance. I knew that our electricity price would be going through the roof because of supply constriction. Since we got the solar panels, we've taken down more trees and we save more from the solar. I estimate we save at minimum average of $50/month (which would be equivalent to $80/month pre-tax gross income).
I use 2700K LED bulbs to save money, post pay-roll taxes, not to save Mother Earth.
These enviro-Nazi Global Climate Change moonbats need to be stopped if we are to restore America to a global competitive economic power. We can increase efficiencies and reduce pollution without having to give away our industrial and technology base to China and India. These limousine liberals have probably never written out their own payments for utilities or ever pumped their own gasoline. They have no concept of how much their non-sense is costing every day Americans, nor do they care. It's all limousine liberal self-congratulatory douchebaggery. Their solution to every problem that doesn't exist is another new tax that will be paid by other people.
It wouldn't shock me if the moonbats imposed a firewood tax as more people burn wood to save on oil and natural gas heat costs. They will stop at nothing to destroy other people's lives and livelihoods in pursuit of the purple dragon that is their addiction to this Global Climate Change nonsense.
I cannot fathom how this isn't a global Communist conspiracy to send American exceptionalism to the waste bin of history. It makes no sense on any level ... incur such increased cost and lower standard of living to not solve a problem that does not exist. Want to cool the Earth so the polar bears can have more ice? Nuke some freaking active volcanoes. Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh!
- your cousin from Boston.
P.S., They had to close the pool for about an hour. They never did find his finger.
-
Since affordable 2700K (soft white) LED bulbs became available in standard sizes (A15/17/19) and standard bases (E26), why would I want to use incadescent bulbs?
I have only incandescent bulbs... At least anything that is going to be on at night is incandescent.
-
Weren't we already put through this during the Obama admin?
Since affordable 2700K (soft white) LED bulbs became available in standard sizes (A15/17/19) and standard bases (E26), why would I want to use incadescent bulbs?
Around this way we're paying $0.12/13 per kWH generation and $0.12/13 per kWH transmission for electricity.
Well, that makes sense for you. At my latitude, solar would have to be mounted in a way as to resist winds clocked over 90 MPH and be able to track the sun (limited to 8 hrs/day in the dead of winter) at nearly the horizon. It just doesn't work here. More power to you. The incandescent bulbs, mainly used in winter, add a smidgin of heat to rooms being used, and are turned off otherwise. The heat isn't wasted, and in some instances is used to keep things from freezing, which even though well insulated in their enclosures require a low grade heat source to stay above 32 degrees.
They've shuddered most of the coal plants. [I think you meant "shuttered", but I get it] They've shutdown a couple nuclear plants (Yankee Rowe, Pilgrim). They won't build or expand the natural gas plants nor pipelines. They've been trying to shove Cape Wind (offshore Nantucket Sound windmills) down our throats for the past 15 years. The state and feds have been subsidizing solar and onshore wind. They won't allow construction of local hydro-electric, so we are going to pay through the nose to get more Quebec Hydro via the New England Clean Energy Connect that Central Maine Power/Avangrid is building through Western Maine.
The Federal Energy Commission has been concerned that Massachusetts is too dependent on a single source of generation - pipeline natural gas - while not building new or expanding exisiting natural pipeline nor LNG. Our electric companies can't even build more intra-state transmission capacity because of town NIMBY's. If we have a long cold spell in Winter, Massachusetts utility customers may have shortages of natural gas heat AND electricity. The moonbats won't even allow for the custruction of new/additional pipeline capacity for to pipe in Marcelleus and Utica fracked shale gas from next door (New York, Pennsylvania). It's nuts. The moonbats are making working people pay more for gas and electricity, risk more shortages, and make the state more economically non-competitive for employers and residents - all so they can feel good about themselves as they have wine, cheese, and lobster at their summer mansions on Nantucket and the Vineyard.
For starters, gas from the Utica is likely coming from PA or Ohio, Marcellus from PA, because NY has had a fraccing and pipeline moratorium going for a few years now. All the down stream folks in New England suffer because of NY policy. How is that not an Interstate Commerce problem?
In 2013, when Solar City (now Tesla) came around offering non-money out-of-pocket rooftop solar leaseback, I jumped at the chance. I knew that our electricity price would be going through the roof because of supply constriction. Since we got the solar panels, we've taken down more trees and we save more from the solar. I estimate we save at minimum average of $50/month (which would be equivalent to $80/month pre-tax gross income).
I use 2700K LED bulbs to save money, post pay-roll taxes, not to save Mother Earth.
These enviro-Nazi Global Climate Change moonbats need to be stopped if we are to restore America to a global competitive economic power. We can increase efficiencies and reduce pollution without having to give away our industrial and technology base to China and India. These limousine liberals have probably never written out their own payments for utilities or ever pumped their own gasoline. They have no concept of how much their non-sense is costing every day Americans, nor do they care. It's all limousine liberal self-congratulatory douchebaggery. Their solution to every problem that doesn't exist is another new tax that will be paid by other people.
It wouldn't shock me if the moonbats imposed a firewood tax as more people burn wood to save on oil and natural gas heat costs. They will stop at nothing to destroy other people's lives and livelihoods in pursuit of the purple dragon that is their addiction to this Global Climate Change nonsense.
I cannot fathom how this isn't a global Communist conspiracy to send American exceptionalism to the waste bin of history. It makes no sense on any level ... incur such increased cost and lower standard of living to not solve a problem that does not exist. Want to cool the Earth so the polar bears can have more ice? Nuke some freaking active volcanoes. Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh!
- your cousin from Boston.
As for this: I cannot fathom how this isn't a global Communist conspiracy to send American exceptionalism to the waste bin of history. It makes no sense on any level ... incur such increased cost and lower standard of living to not solve a problem that does not exist.
I fully agree. There is no other reason to impoverish the 'arsenal of democacy' and the SOviets were sliding funding to global enviro groups in the '70s for the express purpose of hindering western industrial development. In the meantime, they had lakes covered with ten ft. of oil from leaking pipelines and you didn't hear a peep in the Mass Media, who were only interested in attacking America (because you didn't have 'unfortunate accidents' and polonium cocktails from attacking the West).
As for this: P.S., They had to close the pool for about an hour. They never did find his finger.
I'm not sure what that is about, but someone needs to give them the finger.
-
Well, that makes sense for you. At my latitude, solar would have to be mounted in a way as to resist winds clocked over 90 MPH and be able to track the sun (limited to 8 hrs/day in the dead of winter) at nearly the horizon. It just doesn't work here.
Well, yeah it will, barring the wind...
It just costs way more. about double what it does elsewhere. Where eight panels seems to be a fairly average system down in Appalachia, up in here it's twelve or more. And more battery too - and that is still no cause to throw out the jenny.
The feller I am patterning after has 16 panels and eight batteries., and he makes sufficient power, clouds or not, even in the dead of winter. Four circuits (because he built it 4 pans at a time) through two controllers. He hardly ever uses all of it at once, using one or the other, unless it is cloudy, except for in the winter. And he stays lit. And the only time he requires more than it can give him is when he fires up the stick welder in his shop.
Now I am using his formula - 4 panels and two batteries at a time... Live with that for a couple years and add 4/2 more... and so on. That way, 15 years in or so, when it starts to fail, it won't fail all at once. And of course, it is more affordable out of pocket too.
I ain't going that big though, as I am trying to use turbines in a waterfall for my main power, providing I can figure out how to get that power from the creek to the cabin - It is shield country, so I still don't know how I am going to bring the water (and electric) over buried 4 ft deep. it is a bother, and my main concern. Not knowing that, I am starting with solar/jenny. Providing I can have my turbines, I will stop the solar at 8/4 or 8/6.
But I mean to say it can be done.
-
Yeah, that worked out so well last time. :thud:
-
@roamer_1
Any geysers close to you? Wondering how deep you would have to go to get steam power from the underground heat.
-
@roamer_1
Any geysers close to you? Wondering how deep you would have to go to get steam power from the underground heat.
Nice idea, but no. Closest that would work is down in Hot Springs. They've got that (geothermal) going on in a big way over in Spokane, WA... but up in here we are in shale... with hot springs few and far between.
Besides, I have around 20 ft of waterfall, and enough flow to fill a couple 8-10" pipes and not really bother the creek at all. That's what turns me on... All that is really in the way is getting it to the cabin, shop, and barn...
Correction - That ain't the problem. It is really trying to pull water from there... Being in the shield, getting down 4 ft is laughable. But no doubt I could get 16/18" which is plenty to bury a cable or two.... My thinking goes to the water depth, because then the cables are incidental.
So I CAN do the turbines. maybe I have to catch rainwater instead of using that wonderful spring water... Or put in a big cistern and only feed it in the summer with a shallow line I have to blow out in the fall.
One way or another, it is all doable - I am just flopping around on the how. :shrug:
-
WTF???
100 Watt electric heater that screws into a standard Edison Light Bulb socket. Other sizes available.
https://www.processheating.com/products/air-load-bank/cone-heaters/
Other styles are available.
-
So I CAN do the turbines. maybe I have to catch rainwater instead of using that wonderful spring water... Or put in a big cistern and only feed it in the summer with a shallow line I have to blow out in the fall.
One way or another, it is all doable - I am just flopping around on the how. :shrug:
Can you double or triple your solar output and use the excess to pump water from a lower pond to an upper one during the day, and letting it flow downward through a turbine at night? Just thinking outside the box here. It may be easier to create a connect a couple of man-made ponds close by rather than running pipe a further distance.
-
100 Watt electric heater that screws into a standard Edison Light Bulb socket. Other sizes available.
https://www.processheating.com/products/air-load-bank/cone-heaters/
Other styles are available.
Thank you... But I will keep to incandescent bulbs while I can... Dual purpose... See when I have to get under there, they give me light too. happy77
-
Can you double or triple your solar output and use the excess to pump water from a lower pond to an upper one during the day, and letting it flow downward through a turbine at night? Just thinking outside the box here. It may be easier to create a connect a couple of man-made ponds close by rather than running pipe a further distance.
The cabin will be sitting on a puddle lake - it is a rock bowl over 8 feet deep and covering, I don't know, maybe 3-5 acres... Technically I own half of that, though the other half is inaccessible to anyone but me. But I fret pullin out of there for beaver fever. It has a current in it, but I am just adverse to pulling out of still water.
I could pull out of the upper pool in the creek, above the falls, and put a cistern somewhere around where the barn is going to go... The soil is deeper down in there, so I could probably bury water lines deep enough to get to the cabin and barn from there, though the shop would have to be dry, at least in the winter...
But that would be seasonal - I would have to blow the feed line in the fall and live off the cistern through the winter, and then, the cistern would have to be in an earth cellar of some kind, to keep it from freezing, or I have to heat it enough with wood to keep it all winter. It is a bother. If I cannot bury the feed line 4' deep it will freeze, and that is the conundrum.
I CAN collect rain - If I keep all the rain off the barn and cabin and shop, that will fill the cistern too. But I would very much like not having a cistern at all, for the wont of having to put it in an earthen cellar or mound to keep it from freezing, which is the butt-ton of work in that.
SO a butt-ton of work building an above ground soddy for the cistern, or a butt-ton of work chiseling the main water down 4' and not having the cistern... There's the devil's choice.
-
Can you double or triple your solar output and use the excess to pump water from a lower pond to an upper one during the day, and letting it flow downward through a turbine at night? Just thinking outside the box here. It may be easier to create a connect a couple of man-made ponds close by rather than running pipe a further distance.
Sorry, I missed your point... Obviously, two stand pipes by the waterfall would be the most efficient way to do the turbines, or as an alt, take from the upper pool, and use the drop to the lower pool at the bottom of the falls some other way along that hillside. But that puts the power maybe 250-300 ft away from the homestead... I CAN get cable in the ground to deliver that. So I reckon that is what I will do. Digging a trench for the cabling is way better than constructing ponds - and by the by, you still need to think of the winter. Them ponds have to be deeper than 4 feet or they will freeze too, and the pump and lines... it is still about the freeze.
-
Nice idea, but no. Closest that would work is down in Hot Springs. They've got that (geothermal) going on in a big way over in Spokane, WA... but up in here we are in shale... with hot springs few and far between.
Besides, I have around 20 ft of waterfall, and enough flow to fill a couple 8-10" pipes and not really bother the creek at all. That's what turns me on... All that is really in the way is getting it to the cabin, shop, and barn...
Correction - That ain't the problem. It is really trying to pull water from there... Being in the shield, getting down 4 ft is laughable. But no doubt I could get 16/18" which is plenty to bury a cable or two.... My thinking goes to the water depth, because then the cables are incidental.
So I CAN do the turbines. maybe I have to catch rainwater instead of using that wonderful spring water... Or put in a big cistern and only feed it in the summer with a shallow line I have to blow out in the fall.
One way or another, it is all doable - I am just flopping around on the how. :shrug:
Since you are thinking on piping the water in anyway, why not just run the turbine off the piped in water, and shorten your cable run. Any additional vertical drop will only contribute to the pressure at the downstream end.
The problem with solar here, is that the panels have to be supported in a near vertical position to get the right incidence angle, and with the wind here (a calm day is 10-20 MPH, and in the past year we've had gusts to 95 (not a typo, 95)) that would be real hard to keep together.
Any structure that pivots in that will have wind load work the bejeebers out of any backlash in the system and eventually destroy it, so it would have to be fixed, too (and how!) to keep it in place. Other than using it for siding, I really can't see how that would work, and the batteries have to be kept from freezing at 20 or more below zero, too. (For me, it would be an outbuilding powered with the setup, so siding it with the panels would not be the problem, the batteries would).
I have considered vertical axis wind power; multidirectional, so it would not have to pivot to keep oriented into the wind, and to have a smaller footprint as well, because the one constant here is the wind, but sure as all get-out, if I put one of those up, it's quit (and then half the people around would fall over, not knowing which way to lean). :laugh:
-
Can you double or triple your solar output and use the excess to pump water from a lower pond to an upper one during the day, and letting it flow downward through a turbine at night? Just thinking outside the box here. It may be easier to create a connect a couple of man-made ponds close by rather than running pipe a further distance.
Same thing on a much larger scale. I did archaeology work in the lower valley while it was being constructed. https://www.dominionenergy.com/projects-and-facilities/hydroelectric-power-facilities-and-projects/bath-county-pumped-storage-station (https://www.dominionenergy.com/projects-and-facilities/hydroelectric-power-facilities-and-projects/bath-county-pumped-storage-station)
-
Since you are thinking on piping the water in anyway, why not just run the turbine off the piped in water, and shorten your cable run. Any additional vertical drop will only contribute to the pressure at the downstream end.
Nonstarter. I can't get a 1" pipe down 4'... Trying to get something big enough to drive a turbine down that far would be way worse.
The problem with solar here, is that the panels have to be supported in a near vertical position to get the right incidence angle, and with the wind here (a calm day is 10-20 MPH, and in the past year we've had gusts to 95 (not a typo, 95)) that would be real hard to keep together.
Yeah, I get it. I have been looking at a flower petal arrangement for the panels, that can automatically be retracted into the 'leaf' when the wind becomes a problem...
The problem here in the woods is not the wind itself... In the words of Ron White, "It's not THAT the wind is blowin, it's WHAT the wind is blowin..."
I don't think I will ever see more than 80 mph up in here - the mountains don't allow it. But 80's enough if it is blowing chunks of trees around.
The idea is a hell for stout vertical casing, the panels on collars, spread around as 'petals', and a place for them to store that is hell for stout when they are retracted (the 'leaf). It'd be a win for snow too. Just retract it till the storm is over, and let it unfurl again when it is nice outside.
Any structure that pivots in that will have wind load work the bejeebers out of any backlash in the system and eventually destroy it, so it would have to be fixed, too (and how!) to keep it in place. Other than using it for siding, I really can't see how that would work, and the batteries have to be kept from freezing at 20 or more below zero, too. (For me, it would be an outbuilding powered with the setup, so siding it with the panels would not be the problem, the batteries would).
Sounds to me like you should leave it on the ground, on the lee side of the house, or build a cinder block wall upwind to take the weight of it. I dunno.
I have considered vertical axis wind power; multidirectional, so it would not have to pivot to keep oriented into the wind, and to have a smaller footprint as well, because the one constant here is the wind, but sure as all get-out, if I put one of those up, it's quit (and then half the people around would fall over, not knowing which way to lean). :laugh:
LOL! wind is an 'almost' around here. Not enough for more than supplement, most times. I have a plan on a bar napkin around here somewheres, for a large diameter (1.5') cylinder around 10 ft high with variable flutes running the length, that can open some, or close all the way down to impervious-ville... Thought one could have something like that wide open on a low to moderate wind day, and it would spin, just by the virtue of the surface area in the wind - and reduce the surface by closing the flutes the harder the wind was blowing... trying for something that would work in everything from low to high-moderate wind and be able to maintain a predictable speed... Jenny and etc to follow...
Never did build one. :shrug:
-
Nonstarter. I can't get a 1" pipe down 4'... Trying to get something big enough to drive a turbine down that far would be way worse.
How about running the pipe down the creek bed?Yeah, I get it. I have been looking at a flower petal arrangement for the panels, that can automatically be retracted into the 'leaf' when the wind becomes a problem...
The problem here in the woods is not the wind itself... In the words of Ron White, "It's not THAT the wind is blowin, it's WHAT the wind is blowin..."
I don't think I will ever see more than 80 mph up in here - the mountains don't allow it. But 80's enough if it is blowing chunks of trees around.
The idea is a hell for stout vertical casing, the panels on collars, spread around as 'petals', and a place for them to store that is hell for stout when they are retracted (the 'leaf). It'd be a win for snow too. Just retract it till the storm is over, and let it unfurl again when it is nice outside.
That'd be tough to keep in one piece, here. It isn't a question of whether there will be wind, just how much and which way it is coming from. I would imagine your wind directions are more channeled by the ridges, there. Sounds to me like you should leave it on the ground, on the lee side of the house, or build a cinder block wall upwind to take the weight of it. I dunno.
I figured I'd just put arrays on the south facing wall, with the base kicked out from the wall. Winter angle is 68.5 degrees (from horizontal) at optimum for here, and that's purt'near vertical. Spring, Fall, and summer would have a higher output. If I was building from scratch, I'd throw in a ground loop heat pump and heat the slab, and use the solar to run it. LOL! wind is an 'almost' around here. Not enough for more than supplement, most times. I have a plan on a bar napkin around here somewheres, for a large diameter (1.5') cylinder around 10 ft high with variable flutes running the length, that can open some, or close all the way down to impervious-ville... Thought one could have something like that wide open on a low to moderate wind day, and it would spin, just by the virtue of the surface area in the wind - and reduce the surface by closing the flutes the harder the wind was blowing... trying for something that would work in everything from low to high-moderate wind and be able to maintain a predictable speed... Jenny and etc to follow...
Never did build one. :shrug:
That sounds a lot like what I had in mind.
-
Piasola Wind Turbines for Home (https://www.amazon.com/stores/page/67A5B412-655D-480A-9D2C-5A9247A1D5B4)
-
How about running the pipe down the creek bed?
Nope. You'd dig this place... Only one way in, and where you cross the creek is on a rock ledge just below the falls... That ledge is around 80, maybe 100 ft, with only 20 ft of it where a truck will go. after all that, it drops off fast, white water, into the ravine that surrounds two sides of the place.
The further down the creek, the further DOWN the creek. happy77
Above the falls there is about a 50 acre pasture, protected on two sides by cliffs, with the creek boiling up out of the ground dang near in the middle of it... The hill going up to it is awful right by the falls, dang near straight up, though as it goes along into the property, it gets to where it is gentle enough to drive up it, way up against the forest.
The cabin will be in the bottom of that hanging valley, with the ravine on two sides, where a little pothole lake flows off the edge into the ravine. The cabin is going by that lake, or that is the plan for now. That bottom is around 20 acres and that is what I own. The top is another hundred or so, that I control the access to.
That'd be tough to keep in one piece, here. It isn't a question of whether there will be wind, just how much and which way it is coming from. I would imagine your wind directions are more channeled by the ridges, there. I figured I'd just put arrays on the south facing wall, with the base kicked out from the wall. Winter angle is 68.5 degrees (from horizontal) at optimum for here, and that's purt'near vertical. Spring, Fall, and summer would have a higher output. If I was building from scratch, I'd throw in a ground loop heat pump and heat the slab, and use the solar to run it.
That'd be tough up in here. snow load would bury those panels right up against the house. The cabin is going to be on piers 4 ft off the ground, with porches and walks around it at the deck level, with the roof going over all of it just to get the snow off and out of the way... And in the winter, I won;t need the stairs.
I ain't committed to the flower petal thing for the solar, but I am thinking hard about it... that flower can all be on a rotor that tips and spins to follow the sun and sun angle... pretty efficient. But for now, the panels are just going on a frame, south facing, with the upper posts having camper jacks so I can lift the angle for the winter.
That sounds a lot like what I had in mind.
GMTA :beer: :seeya:
-
Above the falls there is about a 50 acre pasture, protected on two sides by cliffs, with the creek boiling up out of the ground dang near in the middle of it... The hill going up to it is awful right by the falls, dang near straight up, though as it goes along into the property, it gets to where it is gentle enough to drive up it, way up against the forest.
Just curious. Do the legs on your cows tend to be longer on one side than the other?
-
Just curious. Do the legs on your cows tend to be longer on one side than the other?
Nope. Just our wimmins. :silly:
-
Piasola Wind Turbines for Home (https://www.amazon.com/stores/page/67A5B412-655D-480A-9D2C-5A9247A1D5B4)
Interesting, thanks!
-
Nope. Just our wimmins. :silly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl03NlOZYnQ
-
[...]
:laugh: