BLACKOUT-PROOF POWER

washingtontimes.com ^ | August 21, 2003 | Alex Cukan

[show me state]

Following the major blackout on the East Coast last week, the demand for Distributed Generation -- using small, on-site power plants -- is heating up.

Distributed Generation is like having a small power plant on-site at a commercial or industrial property. While the property still is connected to the grid, it gets its heat and power from natural gas fired generators so it never has to lose power in a blackout.

[Solson]

Micro-turbines are reliable but require a new engine or an engine overhaul every 40,000 hours...at least Capstones...

I've evaluated the "lease option" proposals of a company similar to RealEnergy and they are no deal...IMO. The cost to operate outweighs most rate structures...

[Wonder Warthog]

"Would it be possible to build units, say about the size of a refrigerator, that could produce electricity for a home? Aside from a Honda generator type thing, of course. Could we all have little boxes in our basements that run on natural gas or propane?"

Research in this area is very heavy. I seem to recall that "some" units are available in the 10KW size range, but haven't read enough about them to give details. Perhaps not surprisingly, a MAJOR driver in that size range is the military, given their growing need for small, LIGHT, reliable, highly efficient sources of electrical power to drive all the new combat electronic and computer systems.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Micro-turbines are reliable but require a new engine or an engine overhaul every 40,000 hours...at least Capstones..."

Which works out to every 4-5 years. I don't consider that an unreasonable major maintenance interval. Add to that the fact that the area is pretty new--I'm sure things will improve as ceramic technology gets better.

[Solson]

Sure, every 4 years but the engine overhaul costs $35-40K!!

The startup equipment cost for a MT plus heat exchanger is about $70K. Install is another $20K. Maintenance is at least $40k over a five year period of time. Cost of Nat Gas will swing with Nymex unless you've locked in annually. So, the initial capex is $90K. Annual maint is $8K, cost of operations is cost of nat. gas...assume $6-7 for a decatherm.

What does all that get you? 60kW. Not enough to do more that take off the top of a peak for many customers. Sure, piggyback them together and get up to 1 MW or so. IT is, at this time, cost prohibitive in the large majority of the country. It's a great concept but financially, it doesn't work.

What we have continued to do is measure the initial capex against reasonable risk assumptions for a negative business impact and associated losses from a blackout.

In the case of the NYC blackout, even those with gensets and MT's experienced problems because of fuel delivery. Diesel and nat gas is pumped with electricity and most of the fueling stations have no backup power.

[Solson]

There are smaller units used every day by switching facilities for telcom companies around the globe. I believe there are some fuel cells in the 20kW range but the prices are quite high.

Stick with the Honda. :)

[chimera]

On top of these, you have the added cost in lives from our current centralized power system. HOw many people have died because they ran into a power pole? Without centralized power our streets could be wider and safer....

Some, not a lot, comparatively speaking. If there is widespread adopotion of home-based generators using NG or hydrogen, there will be lives lost because of gas explosions (there are now, in fact), transportation accidents, etc. Compare the number of people killed in gas explosions to those killed by accidents involving electrical transmission (touching wires by accident, for example). Point is, there are risks associated with any technology. If you play, you pay, one way or the other.

[Wonder Warthog]

"What does all that get you? 60kW. Not enough to do more that take off the top of a peak for many customers. Sure, piggyback them together and get up to 1 MW or so. IT is, at this time, cost prohibitive in the large majority of the country. It's a great concept but financially, it doesn't work."

It must work for some folks, or they wouldn't be selling.

[boris]

"So demonstrate."

The reason the grid exists is because of economies of scale. It simply is not possible to build a "small" electric power plant with the same efficiency as that of a big one. Big ones can use topping, bottoming, intercooling, and many stages in their turbines. Little ones cannot--and remain both little and cost-effective.

Basic physics.

--Boris

[meatloaf]

It is dependent on location which determines retail energy prices and special situations such as other energy sources available. There has to be a break even point below which they can't make the claim they have the cheapest power.

[boris]

"One good resource to educate yourself on this subject is Amory Lovin's book 'Natural Capitalism'."

You have just disqualified yourself to conduct a discussion of energy policy with adults.

Amory Lovins is an ignoramus. He is a socialist. He is a Luddite. For starters.

--Boris

[Concentrate]

DE-centralise energy production. Get off the grid!

[Solson]

Early adopters or those within geographic areas where rates are higher than $0.08 per kWh.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The reason the grid exists is because of economies of scale. It simply is not possible to build a "small" electric power plant with the same efficiency as that of a big one. Big ones can use topping, bottoming, intercooling, and many stages in their turbines. Little ones cannot--and remain both little and cost-effective."

Which is all true, but as usual, you side-step the real issue, which is TOTAL CYCLE EFFICIENCY, and not simply the generation of electric power.

By using the waste heat to provide space heating (and other things requiring low-quality thermal energy), microturbines can capture up to 100% of the fuel energy.

I don't care WHAT "topping, bottoming, intercooling and many stages" central power stations use--since they are located remotely from users, they will NEVER attain that level of efficiency.

Just ONCE, try comparing apples to apples, will ya.

[boris]

"DE-centralise energy production. Get off the grid!"

Even if it costs you--and everyone else--more.

You remind me of those gullible people who sign up to pay more to buy "clean" electricity (generated by wind or hydro). As if the power could be separated out and routed to your house...only "clean" power for me!

Electricity being a fungible commodity, this is a wonderful scam--persuade fools and dupes to pay extra for nothing.

--Boris

[thinking]

Take a look at Plug Power:

....>http://www.plugpower.com/products/prime_residential.cfm

I think the way to go is to have a couple of small units, say 3 KW each, then as your load requires, additional units are put in service.

[SteamShovel]

Here is my opinion.

By the time most of our electricity is generated with Natural Gas, generating your own will be more expensive than buying power from the grid. I'm primarily talking about residential here.

Nuclear and Coal power plants are the least cost and most reliable options. Coal is cheap and abundant. Nuclear is the least polluting option, and can be inexpensive if we allow it to be. Wind and solar power are never going to be able to supply more than a small part of the total demand on the grid. Hydro power is not going to be able to supply all of our needs either. Natural gas is a "fuel of convenience" that should be used for cooking and heat.

Making everyone's electricity with a "fuel of convenience" simply drives the price up (we have already seen this where utilities have built natural gas power plants and cannot afford to run them except on very high power demand days). The balance point of the cost of natural gas micro turbines vs buying power from the grid will be when there is no price advantage for the micro turbines.

Given that the price advantage for micro turbines disappears (if there ever was one), few will want to deal with the hassle of properly maintaining a power plant in the basement for little-to-no savings. Since few will put up with it, most of the companies producing the generators will stop producing. Supply of microturbines and parts goes down and price goes up further killing the incentive. Let's face it, most people are lazy. Most don't even change their own spark plugs in the car, would most maintain a power plant? People (most) have not made any effort to use the solar power that bombards the roof of their house, and that is totally fuel free. What makes anybody think having a turbine that burns fuel and money will be something most would want?

Most likely, you would have to stay connected to the grid for reliability. This would cost a fee to maintain. As fewer people actually use electricity from the grid, the cost of staying connected will rise to help maintain the "safety net". Again, the price advantage disappears.

And the final thing. These turbines will still need to be supplied with fuel. Either by pipeline, which can break down just like a grid, or by delivery truck to storage tanks like propane tanks. These are downsides that I would bet bring the reliability of these little power generators down to the same level as a national grid with central power stations with more personal hassle.

[boris]

Please educate yourself on the infamous history and person of Amory Lovins by reading, oh, the last 300 issues of Access to Energy, once published by the late great Professor Petr Beckmann.

Then you wouldn't make a fool of yourself online.

The big companies also pay off Jesse Jackson who has perfected the art of the shake-down. Lovins provides a (misguided) way for them to point and claim they support "clean" energy.

I stand by everything I said. Go read up in Access to Energy and get back to us--with a healthy serving of crow under your belt.

--Boris