<We Have Much Work to Do, People... The Oil Drum Thursday open thread>

112 comments on Peak Oil and the Environment - last afternoon

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

ericy on May 11, 2006 - 11:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I was noticing that there are a number of coal plants that are now under construction - probably because the utilities see the writing on the wall, and want to get off of natural gas.

There was one speaker at the conference who was talking about how in Israel they are pushing for 100% solar hot water.  Of all of the solar technologies, this is probably the most cost-effective.  So is there any good reason why we couldn't adopt something similar and eliminate the need for those giant 30-40 gallon tanks of water that everyone has (especially in the southern half of the country)?  This type of change would most likely involve local zoning and planning, and one could get this started without the need for the Federal government to do anything.

Someone made the crack that the Federal government was 'constipated', and the sad fact is that it is unclear when Washington is going to become unblocked.  I am starting to think that the best things to be working on right now are ones that don't require the Federal government to get involved.  Things that could be handled on the state and local level are more likely to be quickly implemented.  States or municipalities could work together to come up with plans that are consistent with each other so that there isn't a mish-mash of regulations across the country.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on May 11, 2006 - 11:57am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
IME, 100% solar hot water is better suited to Israel than to the U.S.  

We had a solar water heater when I was growing up in Hawaii.  It worked great...as long as it was sunny.  We had a backup electric water heater for cloudy days, and for days when we needed more hot water than usual.  (Guests, etc.)

My parents built their dream home a few years ago...without solar panels.  The tax incentives that used to exist when they installed the system of my youth were no longer available, and even in Hawaii, it's not economical without them.

The solar water heater I remember would probably not work at all in the northern U.S.  They were basically copper panels with small channels through them.  The sun heated the water as it passed through the channels.  I imagine in the northeast, winter temps would freeze the water and destroy the panels, unless you heated them somehow.  

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TJ on May 11, 2006 - 12:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I can't see many people going for a multi-thousand solar installation when you can get a gas water heater for $400.  You have to be convinced that gas prices will be high for ten years at least. Residential, commercial, and industrial users still believe this is a short term problem.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tate423 on May 11, 2006 - 12:58pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Check out the Rinai Tankless water heater.  No tanks, it just heats your water up as you use it.  Much more efficient and it qualifies for a tax credit.  They start at $600 and the top of the line is about $1200.  I don't know the details, but I've convinced my parents to include one in the house they are building.  On a micro scale, you will be more energy efficient.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Donal on May 11, 2006 - 1:53pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Keep in mind that Rinnai and Rheem only make NG-fired units.  We're cancelling our gas service, and are looking at electric tankless units to use in conjunction with solar-heated water.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tate423 on May 11, 2006 - 2:09pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Ok, but for the basis of heating water isn't NG much more efficient than electric?  I just read somewhere that NG costs are relatively fixed.  So the last quad of NG would take the same energy to extract as the preceding quad.  Electric, mostly coal powered, would be less energy efficient due to the increasing cost to extract.  Or am I off?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Donal on May 11, 2006 - 4:53pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
You are probably correct, but we don't use the NG furnace anymore, so having NG service just for the water heater is too costly.  All the flat fees, taxes, surcharges, etc. add up.  

So we're switching from NG storage to Elec tankless.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
odograph on May 11, 2006 - 7:01pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
i've heard that the partial solution - a small "solar preheat" system attached to a traditional water heater, has a short payback time.  good ROI.  i was probably reading a report based on the california climate however.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Substrate on May 12, 2006 - 12:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1594/is_3_14/ai_101763360

"The average American household spends 20 percent or more of its energy bill on hot water, and much of what's paid for is heat lost through the thin walls of the storage tank in the basement or utility room." ...

"Most solar heating units act as preheaters for conventional units. Although the installation costs are high, owners save from 50 to 85 percent annually on their utility bill, according to the U.S. Department of Energy."

I'm definitely a fan of solar hot water systems.  A lot of fossil fuel could potentially be displaced.  I tried cruching some numbers on what I assume are reasonable numbers for a pre-heating system but for some reason it doesn't seem right.  I know (and the quote above also suggests the same) that they are more effective than the numbers I got.

Assuming the pre-heater raises the temperature of the water to 90F from 55F. (32.2C - 12.8C)  Delta 19.4 C

1gal X (3.785Liter/1gal) X (1000g/1L) X (19.4C) X (4.185 Joule/gram X degC) = 307300 Joules (per gallon)

or 291 BTU (per gallon)

---------------------------
and these were some numbers I crunched of a storage system I saw at a house I visited(he used this system for both hot water and to heat his house):

Assume 150*F to 80*F useable range (delta 70*F or ~39*C)

5000gal X (3.785Liter/1gal)X(1000g/1L) X 39degC X (4.185Joule/gram * degC) = 3089581950 Joules

3089581950 Joule (.00094978 BTU/Joule) = 2934423 BTU

Or... ~23.66 gallons of gasoline (based on BTU's) of storage if the tank is at 150 degrees F.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
clifman on May 11, 2006 - 2:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Solar domestic hot water makes tremendous economic sense, even on an individual level, unlike many things that make societal sense, but have a long payback period for the individual purchaser.  There are now many ways of providing freeze prevention to allow SDHW to work in colder climes.  This is a good general intro:
 http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/hackleman65.html
With state and federal tax incentives - check out http://www.dsireusa.org/ - payback can be in as little as 2-3 years.  Even for more expensive, less efficient systems, payback in 5-7 years is a sound investment.  We just installed ours here in NC.  It's a batch design - more amenable to the sub-tropics like Florida, but I'm going to super insulate and we'll drain if/when we have to, but I doubt we will.  Anyway, both personally and societally, this is one of those simple early things we all can and should do to offset FF use.  Traditional water heaters often need replacement every 7-10 years anyway, so unless you've just replaced yours, you've got that expense coming up anyway.  Do a little research, and at the very least be prepared to go solar when the current one fails.  It's too late to pull it all together when you come home one night to no hot water and a mess in the basement.  Oh, and I concur with the tankless heater option - which in some cases can serve as your solar back-up.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on May 11, 2006 - 2:58pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Anyway, both personally and societally, this is one of those simple early things we all can and should do to offset FF use.  

You do realize that many of us rent, and therefore have no say in what kind of water heater or other appliances we use?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
clifman on May 11, 2006 - 3:57pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Yes, of course, never a good thing to generalize (all).  Just trying to encourage productive measures.  So much of folks reaction is of the deer in the headlights, helpless sort.  I'm just a doomer, trying to find those little things that may help on the way down.  But as you point out, the owner/renter barrier - just as the builder/buyer barrier - is a significant problem to making even the most logical energy improvments.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
fleam on May 11, 2006 - 5:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
This is why my own "doomerosity" has a gradual upward trend also. As mentioned in another post, I rent a bitty apartment but the fridge is huge. The way the sink works, the only way to use warm water without scalding yourself is to have the water gushing at full stream. Oh, and the sink clogs if even a grain of rice falls down there or for no reason at all, so the garbag disposal has to be run, for a minute or so is best, whenever dishes are washed and periodically anyway. Air-drying laundry is  illegal here so when you do laundry, unless you keep it as secret as a pot-growing operation, indoors and hidden, you have to use the dryers as well as the washers in the laundry room. Doing your own gardening is likewise forbidden, there's the gardener, or one of 'em, who comes around with a poorly carbureted leaf blower and blows the leaves around. Sprinklers water the plants nightly, and most of the water runs off, taking soil nutrients with it - it's amazing anything grows the way the humus is cleaned away and the soil water-leached 365 nights a year. The apartments are heated by HUGE electrical heaters which I've never used, it's along one wall and I have storage shelves along there, so I use a small space heater when necessary. The stove is electric, thus ensuring one more highly ineffecient step (burn nat gas to make electricity to use in the stove here instead of just a gas stove). Needless to say the sink drips unless the taps are really shut off tight, and sometimes even then it does. Frankly, this place is almost designed to waste as much energy as possible under the circumstances.

Since at least a third, I think higher, of the population of the US are renters, mostly without the knowledge and awareness I have, to use compact fluorescent bulbs, a more effecient heater, etc., and almost all of which have the universal US household idol, the biggest TV possible, you can see what we're up against here.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tate423 on May 11, 2006 - 3:37pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Don't use the payback method and start using either discounted payback or a net present value equation to determine true cost.  You have to always keep the time value of money in mind.  It doesnt help that the petrodollar is crashing.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.

112 comments on Peak Oil and the Environment - last afternoon

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version