Fairhaven, The River

Hope and enthusiasm vs reality

CNet reports big increases in the (very small) market for small wind systems.  This seems likely to be another case of hope and enthusiasm that is not justified by the reality.  The ever pragmatic Dutch have done a study of a dozen different small wind systems (report in Dutch, article  in English).  The result is that the Dutch will not subsidize or give special rates to small wind systems.  They do have special deals for the large wind systems.  But the economics are so poor in terms of cost per KWh or per ton of CO2 saved that they will not encourage small wind use.

Small wind will continue to have uses in special situations where they are the best economic choice.  But the romantic push for small wind all over suburbs does not make sense.

More eco-news, implementation and management skill matter

The implementation and management of various eco-projects also matter a lot.  Among the various recent articles in Financial Times is one that describes the ongoing failure of the methane recovery systems from pig manure in Mexico.  I've mentioned the various successes in South Asia and elsewhere with these systems.  They are very important in many developing countries.  The technology itself was shown to work in Mexico, with a few successful systems.  But, construction quality problems, intertie and related problems wth the electrical grid, and other management problems have resulted in most of the systems not working. 

There has been a similar shift in the small locomotive industry.  The Green Goat hybrid locomotives have run into serious problems.  A problem with the batteries led to a major recall that drove the manufacturer into bankruptcy.  They've since been purchased and may recover, but  genset locomotives have taken 2/3 of the market.  The hybrid approach of batteries and one large engine is not superior to the approach of having 3 smaller engines and only running as many as are needed.

In both cases the concept was sound, but you need good management and implementation as well.

Some good news

An ongoing failure provides some good news on the world energy tech front.  This failure is the  solar cooker efforts.

Solar cookers are one the enduring faith vs reason battles when aiding the poor in third world countries.  The current leading solar cooker costs about $10, uses mostly local materials, and meets about 75% of cooking needs.  Clouds, bad weather, and high temperature needs drive the remaining 25%.  They continue to fail in response to:

• High efficiency wood/brush cookers.  These cost now about $2, use entirely local materials, and can meet 100% of cooking needs.  They have efficient designs and flues, so that the problems of smoke, accidental fires and burns are tremendously reduced.  They consume less fuel and can burn scavenged brush.  The net effect is also a 75% reduction in fuel use.  It's fairly obvious why these are tremendously popular and solar cookers are not.
• Gobar gas systems are spreading steadily through South Asia.  These convert livestock manure into low grade gas.  They are highly popular in India and Nepal, with use slowly spreading elsewhere.   They are an easy transition for people who previously were using dried dung as fuel.  The gobar systems use dried dung, plant wastes, and controlled amounts of liquid in a gas digester to produce usable gas for cookers.  Gas cookers are much cleaner, safer,  and more efficient than dung fueled heaters. These systems are too expensive for the really poor, but subsidies bring them within affordable reach of the successful farmer with a livestock herd.  They are climate limited to places where the dung can be dried naturally.  This includes much of South Asia.
• Variations on Gobar systems are showing up in other agricultural areas.  Indonesian pig farming, Thai pig farming, and US dairy farming all have introductory systems in operation.   These will become much more popular as the technology is understood, made more reliable, and the information about its use spreads.

These all act to reduce the deforestation in South Asia, and the manure gas systems also reduce the methane emissions from livestock.  They lower the immediate demand for fossil fuels, although this reduction is a very small percentage of world use.  They primarily make the agricultural areas much less dependent on fossil fuels.  There is only a little excess production to support more urban uses.  Variations on the cooker technology are also sold in Africa, where wood fueled cookers are also used.

The gobar systems may even improve life in Afghanistan if the civil war ever subsides enough to enable reconstruction of permanent fixtures like the qanats and construction of gobar gas generators.  The Gurkhas are certainly pushing for it (toward the end of the article).

The latest in sailboats

I noticed this nice writeup on the early experiences with the Beluga Skysails.  It gives some real numbers, like a 10% reduction in fuel use for the ship, and a realistic report on how the highly risk averse maritime industry evaluates and reacts to a radically new technology.  Kudos to the US Navy for supporting this effort with their long term contract to use the ship.  They understand that it takes several years of genuine operational experience to settle in a technology.  (At least in this case.  The USN overall track record is a lot shakier.)  A few more years and some higher fuel prices may see more of these ships be launched or retro-fitted.  The retro-fit alternative is one thing that makes this technology interesting.  It reduces the capital investments needed.

The cover page has a better picture.  The photo in the article is some heavily photoshopped composite.  I've seen the real ship carrying the real wind turbines, and it did not look like that at all.  They did go for a symbolic use of a sail assisted ship carrying wind turbine on it's first commercial voyage.  But it was only turbine blades above decks.

Heating Season Assessment

This winter's heating season is about finished.  I did my assessment of how changes have affected my home energy use.  In summary:

• Heating consumption reduced about 20%
• Electricity consumption reduced about 130W

Electricity

The Kill a Watt has definitely paid for itself.  I went around doing various measurements and made decisions based on measurements.  There were three surprises to me:

1. The inkjet printer consumes almost 10W when sitting idle.  This is much more than I expected, given its energy star rating.  When I re-read the energy star regulation I found it requires an idle consumption of under 10W, which the printer does just barely meet.  So I changed my habits to turn off the printer whenever I pick up printed results or finish scanning. This is not much extra work.  If I forget, it doesn't matter much, I just turn it off when I notice. 
2. Ethernet hubs consume 10-15W.  That was more than I expected.  I did some re-cabling and built one crossover cable to eliminate the need for one hub.
3. My wireless telephone consumes 20W.  I haven't replaced it yet.  I could replace it and the remote with a DECT phone that consumes 5W.  This would save $15/yr and cost about $60.  My delay makes me a typical consumer.  An ROI of 25% does not inspire a purchase.

No surprise was the benefit from consolidating an internal server and the need to put TV and DVD on a powerstrip for an easy on/off.  Doing all this has a net savings of about 130W based on electricity bills.  This is a savings of $200/yr.

I have already shifted lights to CFLs, so it's getting harder to cut much more without some substantial changes.  The next thing that I could do is replace an old PC (233 MHz Pentium) that acts as my general proxy server for scrubbing ads, filtering traffic, email fetching, etc.  It's a matter of lots of software reconfiguring.  I don't feel like putting in all that time to save about $50/yr.

Heating

This was based on degree days and oil usage in gallons.  I saved about 20% through two major steps:

1. An aggressive effort with caulk and plastic to weatherstrip and seal windows, etc.  Having done all that I also got enough improvement that I have figured out remaining things to tackle.
2. A questionable mechanical thermostat was replaced with an electronic setback thermostat.  I think the old one was not working properly.  The automatic setback didn't seem to be effective.  The new one definitely works. 

Short of major home construction changes like opening up walls to re-insulate, I probably won't get more than another 10%.  From an ROI perspective I've gotten most of the easy changes.  The heating system is already measured at 85% system efficiency.  That's as high as you get with heating oil and normal systems. 

APS Report

I haven't gotten into checking analyses and references, but the APS Energy Effficieny Report looks good.  Unlike the McKinsey report, this one explains the analysis and sources.  More later (probably much later) when I have had time to read and examine it in detail.

Jet Engine Washing

United and Southwest recently started using Pratt and Whitney's EcoPower system for washing jet engines.  Ecowash was first operational at Schipol (Amsterdam) about a year ago.  Since it works on any kind of jet engine (not just P&W) and does save about 1% on fuel burn, I expect that within a year everyone will be using it.  The system removes dirt and grime inside the engine, and improved engine operation is about 1%.

Previous systems involved either highly toxic chemicals or had substantial waste disposal problems.  JFK and a few other airports had banned the approaches involving toxic chemicals.  This system used just water jets, and has an internal wash recycling so that final waste disposal does not involve the general airport wastewater.  The waste still needs disposal processing, but it's now just because of the engine grime itself, not solvents or detergents.

RNP (Airline Energy Efficiency)

Southwest Airlines announced their plans for using RNP to improve efficiency (this presentation has nice graphical illustrations) a while ago.  They just announced their vendor selection.  Southwest is not the first to use RNP.  Alaska Airlines has been using it very effectively in Alaska for several years.  The primary motivation there was dealing with the mountains and bad weather.  The reduction in flight cancellations and flight diversions justified the high capital investment.  RNP has also been prototyped in the US by Delta and in Australia to improve flight operations at congested airports (while also reducing fuel use).

The big deal with Southwest is that this will be system wide for them, with every airplane upgraded to RNP navigational equipment and every airport that they use having RNP approaches designed.  This is a big dollar investment.  The FAA portion of the investment in approach designs and ATC procedural changes is not called out.  Much of this is being designed by Southwest's vendor so that it is ready now for the Southwest routes and aircraft, instead of waiting for the FAA funding schedule.  The FAA needs to review, approve, and integrate the procedural changes.  Southwest is spending $175 million over six years to do this and upgrade their avionics, and expects to get a return of about $25 million/yr in fuel use savings.  They will also get a non-dollar savings from reducing flight times by 1-2 minutes per flight, and from using continual glide descents.  The FAA expects to reduce load on ATC and increase airport capacity slightly, based on preliminary experience with RNP.

Delta, American, and other airlines have been rolling out RNP support within the US and internationally to deal with difficult airports, where congestion or terrain give a special advantage to RNP.  Southwest is the first to announce that it will be system wide.

Kitchen energy consumption data

Now that my power meter is in the kitchen, I'll be accumulating measurements for various devices.  The latest list is:

• Bread Maker - 0.32 KWh per loaf (1.5 - 2.0 lb loaf, no special settings)
• Slow Cooker - 1.25 KWh per meal (this will vary between 1.0 and 2.0 depending on hours cooking)
• Quinoa in Rice Cooker - 0.25 KWh for 3 cups cooked.  (I'm assuming more food will consume more power, but I rarely make more than 4 cups at any one time.)

I can only measure things that use standard outlets, so the stove and oven remain a mystery.  These other smaller appliances seem to be fairly efficient.  I've seen very little information on the web or manufacturers sites about actual consumption in use.

Green Walls

I've been tracking green roofs for a while and bringing them up as part of the town planning process when it seemed appropriate.  These green walls are an interesting variation.  Some of them seem to be really interesting works of art.
Others are fairly functional forms, with examples from Japan and from New York.  (I have no idea how long those newspaper links will survive.)

Whether these make good economic sense as well is unclear, but they might be a cost competitive alternative to the ordinary wall.