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.

[show me state]

RealEnergy

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[snopercod]

"It's also more efficient, pollutes less and is less expensive than buying power from the grid..."

Amazing! Three lies in one short sentence.

[Made In The USA]

Wrong, it's way more efficient! You just have to clean up the biodegradeable waste from the 10,000 gerbils running in their little super power generating wheels.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Amazing! Three lies in one short sentence."

Sorry, wrong. The approach "is" more efficient than buying grid power---because it also utilizes the normally "waste" heat to provide on-site heating and cooling. I don't know enough about the pollution aspects to make a judgemnt (although I suspect that claim is also true).

Of course, the "less expensive" depends on the price of natural gas, which is more dependent on politics than economics.

[Mr170IQ]

"It's also more efficient, pollutes less and is less expensive than buying power from the grid..."

Amazing! Three lies in one short sentence.

No, it's not a lie, exactly. The concept is called "co-generation", and it involves using the waste heat from the electrical generator for industrial heating. IF you need ALL of the waste heat, then it becomes much more efficient than simply generating electric power from the fuel and also producing heat by burning fuel.

[boris]

""It's also more efficient, pollutes less and is less expensive than buying power from the grid," Jason Fanselau, spokesman for RealEnergy, told United Press International."

This is demonstrably false.

--Boris

[Maringa]

I see that Congress is about to over reach and through billions, possibly trillions to upgrade our electrical system in upcoming bills and political campaigns. I would rather them spend money on research and subsidize alternative sources of power generation such as individual fuel cell systems for homes and businesses. This would reduce the need for tranmission lines, facilities, etc. Talking about something that would be terrorist proof. Unfortunately, power companies, etc. will have their hand in the pot and steer us away from a more sensible approach...

[Wonder Warthog]

"This is demonstrably false."

So demonstrate.

[Geritol]

Not only can they extract more energy by using the waste heat, that some power plants use for something but most do not, but onsight power production also saves on the costs and losses of transmission.

Between 2 and 10 percent of all generated electricity is lost in transmission. these losses come from the following: resistive heating of hundreds of miles of cable, inductive coupling of power to the surrounding environment, and minor losses in the step-up and step-down processes.

Further, you have those millions of poles, acres of distribution points, thousands and thousands of miles of cable, thousands of service trucks, mllions of oil filled transformers, and a few other miner details impacting the cost and overall efficiency.

Compare all that to having natural gas exhaust coming out of each building, gas pipelines, heat exchangers, maintenance on each setup, and additional building space and infrastructure in each location instead of one remote site.

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....

[snopercod]

Your economic analysis includes 100% backup for the co-generated heat, right? You don't want your workers to freeze and all your chemicals to freeze just because you have to take your little cogen plant down for maintenance.

And because the electrical grid is the backup for the generated electricity, you still have to pay for that service, too.

Then of course, you have to hire power plant maintenance and operation staff, electricians, chemical techs, and people to file all the EPA emission reports.

When you start adding in the cost of all these "details", these politically correct schemes only make sense for the tax breaks.

[Solson]

Umm...care to address the need to maintenance expenses associated for DG, the ongoing price of diesel or compressed natural gas as well as the other costs?

Hey, if you're in LIPA territory, sure CHP or DG may make sense. But at a cost to operate around $0.06 per kWh plus the cap-ex, CHP and/or DG doesn't work in most areas of the country unless the bill is covered by the gas companies, etc.

[Solson]

Actually...some of the newere microturbines, like Calpine's have very little in emissions. Of course, if you're using diesel generation, that doesn't hold true.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Your economic analysis includes 100% backup for the co-generated heat, right? You don't want your workers to freeze and all your chemicals to freeze just because you have to take your little cogen plant down for maintenance."

Micro-turbines are far more reliable than any other type of generator (aside from fuel cells, that is), and just like any other power plant, such outages can be and are planned for. One hundred percent backup capacity is NOT required.

And because the electrical grid is the backup for the generated electricity, you still have to pay for that service, too."

Not completely true--you have to pay for AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE, but not for the power you no longer use. And in fact, in some states, any excess power you DON'T need is sold back to the utility to which you are hooked up. In such cases, a "distributed power" generation system will not only pay for the "availability of power" service, but can actually be a profit center during "off-peak" hours.

"Then of course, you have to hire power plant maintenance and operation staff, electricians, chemical techs, and people to file all the EPA emission reports."

Not at all--those are provided by the company supplying the equipment. You "did" check the link and realize that there is a LEASE option available??

Nice "hypothetical" disadvantages---fortunately none of which are true. Try again.

[snopercod]

Backup is not required...because you say so.

It's completely reliable...because you say so.

No extra hiring is required...because you say so.

I am wondering if you have any experience working around equipment like this, and any experience running a buisiness where electricity and heat are mandatory all the time.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I am wondering if you have any experience working around equipment like this, and any experience running a buisiness where electricity and heat are mandatory all the time"

Nice strawman comments. Try actually READING what I said.:

1) Of course SOME level of backup is required, but 100% backup capacity is not. Every facility that "I" know about has "designed in" overcapacity, and can be run at a lower power availability without shutting down.

2) No piece of equipment is 100% reliable (nor that is not what I said). Microturbines are simply far MORE reliable than any competing technology. Read up on the technology--you might actually learn a little something about why that's true.

3) The specific manpower capabilities you referred to are provided by the company supplying the microturbines. There probably would be an extra hire or two to do routine maintenance.

And yes, Virginia, I "do" have eperience working in industries where electricity and heat are mandatory all the time (and in fact at a major chemical manufacturer who generated all their own power on-site, so I "do" know about planned outages, and capacity factor design). Funny thing, they always had heat and electricity available when they needed it. It was called PLANNING AHEAD. The simple way to handle it is to look at the total load and buy three smaller units whose combined output matches the required load.

[Semper911]

Hey thanks for your experience and knowledge here. 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?

I mean, just how micro are these micro turbines?

[RightWhale]

It's not cheap, but you can have a fuel-cell generator in your building, out on the lawn actually. Might be handy sometime.