>The structural costs of adding solar to an existing remodeling project can
>be zero or close to zero as it was for Wendy Menken (in Como who did it as
>part an attic redo) and most of the people in St. Paul.
As well it should be- the weight of the collector tanks is no
more than a good snow load.
>In the past few years I've paid anywhere between 90cents and $1.95 a therm.
>If you look at the 5 year and ten year forecasts for gas prices, doubling is
>in the near future. So if your payback is 10 years at a buck a therm at
>$2/therm its 5 years ,and $3/therm its 3.33 years--you get the picture. But
>don't believe me, read the DOE forecasts or the Green Institute's recent
>report on biomass for Rock-Tenn (p.51).
As I heat with renewables (corn and wood pellets), my only
natural gas use is for the water heater and the pilot light on the
space heater I keep around for backup. My natural gas bill is about
$30 a month. If I shut off the space heater completely and install a
natural gas powered demand water heater for $1000 my gas bill would
drop to about $10/month. That's about a 4 year payback, a pretty good
deal. Costs for an electric demand water heater are similar but the
initial investment is lower- I've got one here that I picked up on
sale for less than $200. Even if I ran it an hour a day it would
still heat all the water I need and then some for less than
$10/month. I priced out a bare bones solar water heater system and it
was about $3000+ just for materials. That gives at least a 25 year
payback, none too attractive when you can get 5% returns on pretty
safe bonds.
>The payback is immediate in some ways, as pointed out by a solar user here
>in Como who is also a green architect in the neighborhood. Immediately you
>cut those carbon emissions, immediately you generate carbon offsets (which
>have a value if traded on the carbon market), and immediately you are not
>extracting and burning a limited fossil fuel in a non-sustainable way.
Running full tilt that little demand water heater is using up
maybe 3 horses for less than an hour a day. Compare this to the big
trucks that use up 100 times that much energy and the locomotives
that use 1000 times that much energy running day and night. If you
want to save energy and reduce pollution, don't waste your time on
the toys- go after the big belchers.
>So
>if going green is your priority an not maximizing your investment solar and
>wind make good sense. But, don't believe me, ask someone with panels.
Not being independently wealthy like most of our citizens, I
have to have some economic payback in my lifetime to make me go green.
>Some Como residents were concerned about vandalism, since we have lots of
>drunken college students flinging things around on weekends and for that
>polycarbonate panels could cover the glass this is what they often use in
>bus shelters or as "bullet proof" or shatterproof coverings for windows.
>But, don't believe me, ask an engineer.
Being a sometime North Minneapolis resident, I've had to
study up on ballistics engineering. I'm writing from within what is
essentially a bunker in my shop, with several hundred pounds of corn,
bulk powdered detergent, and ice melter in front of me. To my left is
a car, and to my right is a thick steel woodstove and toolbox. Behind
me are 3 motorcycles and more heavy steel stuff. This is how we
survive on the Northside. I and all my neighbors have had bullets
come through our windows- how long do you think a solar panel would
last up here? As for plexi, the military has driven the price for the
good optically clear stuff beyond what we can afford.
>Hot water is usually considered to be 125 degrees (or hotter), so 110 is 15
>degrees from that. Body temperature is 98.6 so above that will be percieved
>as "hot". The 40 degree water that comes in from the City in the winter
>time is considered "cold". 40 degrees is 60 degrees away from "hot" meaning
>you have to use a lot of energy to heat that difference vs. the 110 in
>winter meaning that even in the dead of winter--solar thermal panels will
>heat your water and save you money. In summer the systems will get it up to
>180-200 easy if the controller is set that high--which the solar installers
>won't typically allow. But, don't belive me ask a solar installer or put
>your hand in water 180 degrees and let us know if you think it's up to
>Paris' standards ("that's hot").
I'm quite aware of the physics- I went a summer without a
water heater and it wasn't all that bad. However, there are still
times when you need really hot water for degreasing, washing
cookware, etc..
>If you go to the DOC website they'll tell you that typically people can heat
>75-90% of their hot water. Some pepole end up shuting off their hot water
>heater since they can use hot water as available. Don't believe me, look up
>solar thermal on the Dept of Commerce's website under Energy Information
>Center.
Again, I'm quite aware of the physics and costs. In fact, if
you want to cover your whole roof and yard with solar collectors and
build a big enough heat storage medium you could probably heat your
house as well as your bath water- but it'd probably cost more than
your house!
>Now that we have a almost a dozen systems in Minneapolis and 5 in St. Paul
>if you have questions I can take you over to real people's homes and you can
>ask real questions about real issues you may or may not have. You can tell
>those people all day long how solar doesn't work
I have no doubt that the systems work, but at $20,000 and up,
when will they pay for themselves?
>and then maybe you'll want
>to knock on your neighbor's door and tell them their Toyota Prius doesn't
>save gasoline,
Compared to what? And with many more enlightened motorists
switching to renewables the Prius can't even run on, who cares?
> and see if that response is similar.
I question the environmental wisdom of anyone that tells me
they've bought a Prius or installed solar electric panels. Why?
Because they obviously aren't real good at math and science or just
bought those green fashion accessories to look cool. My VW TDI diesel
car cost a bit over $100 more than the gas equivalent and had paid
back that premium by 40,000 miles. A Prius costs twice as much as an
equivalent conventional car and will probably never pay for itself.
>Adding alcohol and being
>extra belligerent always bolsters this process . I recommend gin & tonics,
>which are in season don't you know.
Humans do not run well on alcohol, exhibiting instability in
both gait and cognitive functions. The alcohol is much better used as
a motor fuel provided the driver stays away from the alcohol supply.
None the less, I suspect small amounts are useful to drown the
sorrows of the folks that paid $30,000 for a Prius before they did
the numbers.
runnin' on renewables in Hawthorne (corn) and Starbuck (biodiesel),
Dyna Sluyter