article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (12) View image gallery Image Gallery (2) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
2 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
November 12, 2009

Energy Saving: Much Cheaper Than Building Power Plants!

On an electrical grid, supply must always exactly equal demand or the voltage goes unstable. Our utility laws very effectively encourage building of power plants to meet an ever-growing demand. This seemed like wise policy in the days of almost free energy but today it encourages gross investment inefficiencies. Power utilities maximize profits by spending as much as possible on expansion of supply even though energy saving could much more efficiently accomplish the same result.

It costs about $2.50/watt to build a new coal power plant. But replacing light bulbs can decrease demand for only $.025/watt!  (A 13-watt compact florescent bulb replacing a 60 watt incandescent bulb reduces demand by 47 watts for only $1.19. $1.19/47=  $.025/watt)  A properly motivated power utility can accomplish the equivalent of building an expansion power plant at much lower cost by just giving compact florescent lamps to their customers.

That's exactly what Southern California Edison did in 2007 by sending out sample CFLs to their customers with discount coupons that resulted in over a million lamp replacements. That's 47 megawatts demand reduction when they're all turned on! Another program paid $100 towards an efficient, Energy Star refrigerator and offered free pickup of the old refrigerator. Eight hundred thousand refrigerators were replaced on this program.

In most states this would be a suicidal move for a utility because selling less electricity means making less money. However, California made it good business by rewriting the utility laws to decouple earnings from sales. Utilities are rewarded per customer, based on meeting goals rather than the amount of power sold. . They established a loading order that makes energy saving a top priority. Everybody wins because less fuel is burned so there is less pollution and less global warming.

In the 1970s refrigerators used an average of 1800 kwh per year. In 1975 the US tightened efficiency standards for refrigerators. The manufacturers complained loudly that costs would skyrocket. They were wrong. Today, refrigerators cost half as much and consume one fourth as much power.

This pattern is repeated again and again as people naturally defend the status quo when it is challenged. The EPA Energy Star program periodically raises the bar on energy standards. Reduced standby power consumption on TVs and computers is a recent campaign against waste. Back when power was almost free, these wasteful ways seemed to make sense.

We must continually reexamine traditional assumptions as history often takes us down a wrong path. The urinals found in men's public bathrooms are a perfect example. For a century urinals have had a flush handle on them. Then somebody invented the automatic flusher triggered by electronically sensing body heat. It seemed like a great invention till somebody realized that this complexity was totally unnecessary.

The waterless urinal needs no flusher, no power and no water because it has an ingenious plastic trap filled with a heavy blue liquid that keeps sewer smells in without flushing. Each flush urinal wastes 20,000-40,000 gallons of water a year. If all of the urinals in the US were waterless we would save 160 billion gallons of water per year!  Sometimes it pays to stand back and rethink the assumptions of the past.

Early in this century we had a nice life based on very little energy consumption. Almost-free energy has led us to change our lifestyle in many ways that should probably be re-examined now. Modern lighting, heating and air conditioning went from uneven coverage to uniformity because cheap energy made that possible. It may be a good time to question whether uniform light and temperature is really better.

Modern lighting spotlights the beautiful or useful and leaves the rest in shadow. A family gathered in front of the fireplace accepts it as natural that the rest of the room is cooler. A fan, an open window or a front porch provides an enjoyable oasis from warm weather. Perhaps we could save a lot of energy by learning to accept uneven temperatures in parts of rooms that we only pass through briefly. A ceiling fan can cool sitting areas with much less energy than it takes to air condition every corner of the house.

Those old stone buildings never get very hot or cold because the massive stone walls cool them during the heat of the day and warm them at night with stored heat from the day. Modern lightweight construction has lost this thermal inertia and requires much more heating and cooling.

PCM wallboards (Phase Change Material) embed wax beads that melt at 78 degrees in the  plaster. Just like melting ice, they they cool the wall when it tries to get hotter than 78. At night , when the wall gets cooler, the wax refreezes, giving back heat in the process. A 15 mm PCM wallboard is as effective for heat retention as a 90 mm of concrete or 150 mm of brick! Tiny acrylic microspheres filled with wax are embedded in wallboard allowing normal nailing and cutting without worry. The microspheres can also be mixed into concrete or plaster.

Ceiling fans make it possible to greatly reduce air conditioning use. On warm days you can just open the windows and you'll enjoy the coolness under the fan and enjoy the day. If it gets too hot, try setting the thermostat to eighty degrees and letting the fans cool just your sitting areas.

During cold weather you can keep the heat at sixty or so and enjoy sitting by a fire or pellet stove. Ceiling mounted radiant heating panels can make you feel very cozy even though the room is only sixty. NAHB research found they could save 52% compared to electric baseboard heaters. When you are walking around, sixty feels just fine. Sitting is what makes you cold and you usually do that in only a few places in the house.

Try to give your body a chance to adapt to heat or cold. Your comfort zone is partly a matter of conditioning. Push yourself a bit and you will find that you don't really need such a uniform temperature.

If you live in a very hot or very cold climate a ground source heat pump can save a lot of energy. Deep in the ground the temperature is mild and stable. Buried heat exchange tubing can be used to pump heat to or from the house to the ground. Efficiency can be as high as 500% compared to traditional heating. These systems are expensive to install but can greatly reduce high heating and air conditioning bills.

The seemingly-expensive upfront costs are cheap compared to the cost of building the additional power generating capacity to power a  conventional air conditioner. Currently you can take a tax write-off if you install a heat pump system. In an ideal world a rational choice would be made between spending money on building more generating capacity or reducing demand by installing heat pumps. Currently, utility laws in most states make it inevitable that we will overspend on generating capacity and underspend on efficiency.

Insulation is one of the home upgrades with the fastest payoff. An attic fan can pay for itself in one year in some cases. Roof insulation is very cost effective too. Window replacements can pay for themselves in a few years, particularly if windows are leaky. New infrared cameras can spot heat leaks in a moment. They show as red, areas where repair work is needed (see images, below). Professional consultants can do an energy audit on your house that typically result in a 20-40% savings if indicated repair work is done.

Hot water is very inefficiently done in the US. In Europe most people have tankless water heaters that come on only when they use hot water. These are more efficient and they save water because you don't have to waste it waiting for the hot water to arrive from a distant tank. In China most new construction uses solar hot water from vacuum tubes on the roof. In Japan, Honda makes a combined heat and power (CHP) system that uses natural gas to generate electricity and uses the waste heat from the generator to make hot water. The overall efficiency is 85% and the electricity generated can run the meter backwards.

Volkswagen is introducing a similar unit in Germany and Australia has a new unit based on a solid oxide fuel cell. Several European power utilities are planning to these units to customers at discount as a more economical and efficient way to expand power generation.

Now that the almost-free energy is used up we must break our old wasteful habits and begin to respect efficiency. We are wasting so much now that it will be easy and fun to discover new and more efficient ways to live.

If we can improve our efficiency it will cost us less, not more. We just have to take the money we would have spent to build more and more power plants and spend it instead on efficiency improvements. The problem is in our legal structure that subsidizes the wrong things. If we can change our utility laws, the technical solutions are easy. 

Image Gallery (2)
 
Reader Comments (12)
 
No image available
November 12, 2009
Phase Change Material (PCM) wall boards are listed above and are a great application. The PCM revolution taking place in Europe is now moving to the US and in addition to wall board there are also bio-based PCM wall mats that tend to have a broader spectrum of application for the end user. To learn more about high peformance building that includes bio-based PCM visit www.biopcm.com
Comment 1 of 12
No image available
Anonymous
November 13, 2009
Excellent article. It should also be stated the amount of energy wasted in so many public areas. Shopping malls, movie theaters, supermarkets where you need a good sweater in the summer and a bikini in the winter due to the excessive heating/cooling. I would like to know the numbers on the amount od energy wasted this way.
Comment 2 of 12
No image available
BF1
November 13, 2009
"In Japan, Honda makes a combined heat and power (CHP) system that uses natural gas to generate electricity and uses the waste heat from the generator to make hot water. The overall efficiency is 85% and the electricity generated can run the meter backwards."

Above is exactly what Scandinavian power companies have succesfully done and achieved remarkable savings by investing in CHP power plants.
Comment 3 of 12
No image available
November 13, 2009
An energy revolution is needed Mr Blakeslee! Please do not make the mistake of just considering the position of your readers in the developed world. We inadventantly all support a system of agriculture that relies on large consumption of power to produce fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. Global Phospate resources are at a critical level, in particular those of the US. Base load electricity principally supports 3 phase pumping of industrial, household and Human Waste for separation and treatment. Adoption of EcoSan and new dry sanitation methods, linked to agricultural recovery, has potential to reduce the total electricity consumption by up to 20%. The beneficial spin off is low cost recovery of Total Nutrients for agriculture; producing that "TERRAPRETA " if you like, otherwise wasted. Consider also those health benefits that will accrue.
Comment 4 of 12
No image available
Anonymous
November 13, 2009
fellow anonymous. Public space wasted utilities are frustrating. However i read an encouraging article about the largest Mall .. Mall of America in the coldest of places ... Bloomington, MN that the entire shared interior (common space) is heated just by body heat of shoppers.

"In reality, we don't heat the mall," said Anna Long, a spokesperson for the Mall of America. "There's no central heating system which is incredible if you think about it."

Shoppers are heating up the mall. The body heat of 40 million visitors each year is one of three heating sources. Sunshine from the skylights, which are seven and a half acres of glass and miles of artificial lights help too.

The mall is typically 72 degrees in the winter.

Individual stores must have their own heating systems, but during future renovations, experts may find a way to harness the extra heat produced.
Comment 5 of 12
No image available
November 13, 2009
I agree with your conclusion that conservation and smart designs are cheap and can show a major price advantages (not to mention environmental benefits) over new generation. But I challenge your lightbulb example. I think assumptions need to be made with respect to capital cost, as well as load duration. The capital cost of the new lightbulb is $1.19, but don't the real savings also depend on the usage of the lightbulb since we buy power in $/kWh? The savings calculation is more complex and there should be a payback period associated with new energy efficient devices.
Also a new Natural Gas Combined Cycle Plant, costs less than $1000/ kW; which would be the preferred choice over coal.
Comment 6 of 12
No image available
Anonymous
November 16, 2009
The author writes:
"In Japan, Honda makes a combined heat and power (CHP) system that uses natural gas to generate electricity and uses the waste heat from the generator to make hot water. The overall efficiency is 85% and the electricity generated can run the meter backwards."

These CHP systems can produce electricity at attractive prices compared to retail market prices (1 therm of gas at about $0.50 a therm is equivalent to 29.3 kWh, so if the conversion to electricity is ~20% efficient you get ~6 kWh per therm or electricity at ~8 cents/kWh with free heat from the remaining ~65% of the productive energy released). However, this generation is typically off peak demand times so it displaces low-priced base load generation rather than peaking power requirements and would not typically remove the need for new power plants. As such, I don't think it should qualify for the net metering mandates given to renewable technologies such as solar PV. The electricity companies sometimes estimate that the cost of service for residential customers is ~60% from energy production and ~40% from distribution infrastructure. Full net metering is thus similar to a 40% subsidy because those that receive it don't pay their share of the cost of the network infrastructure. Large subsidies for fossil fuel generation of electricity that does not reduce the need for peaking power seems overly generous....
Steven
Comment 7 of 12
No image available
November 16, 2009
I, like simpsonm @6, disagree with Blakeslee's lightbulb savings calculation, but for the opposite reason.

You are only counting captial costs of equipment. But the power plant costs money to run constantly (+ operating cost) while the CFL lasts many times longer than incandesent bulbs (lowering operating costs).

True efficiency is a savings multiplier!

http://time-is-energy.blogspot.com/
Comment 8 of 12
No image available
November 17, 2009
No one seems to mention the NASA Radiant barrier Aluminum 5 layered Foil technology , that I have known about for over 20 years, MY home I applied a similar system in a double wall construction with the foil in between and my home will retain it's temperature for 2 hours or more without heating and or cooling at the same level, even if the outside temperature is e.g. 98 my home only goes up to 76 (without cooling) if it is outside 32 my house slowly goes down to 50 (without heating), this system was only applied in wall application only my next house it will be in the attic. If I build a Hurricane resistant home with Miami-Dade certified 150 mph rated hurricane shutters
with Insulated Concrete Forms with Fly-ash 12" thick, radon-proof,rot-proof,hurricane-proof,sound-proof, Leed Platinum Certified and energy producing, Carbon zero neutral and finally building my own electric car, as of that moment I am truly a part of the solution instead of the problem, My house is available for public viewing on its own dedicated website at http://indianacapecodhome.com, I am open for criticism and comments
Comment 9 of 12
No image available
November 18, 2009
--------"with Insulated Concrete Forms with Fly-ash 12" thick, radon-proof,rot-proof........."---------------

I'd question the "radon" proof claim for panels that are made using flue ash. They could possibly be a more concentrated radon source than surrounding soil.
Comment 10 of 12
No image available
November 18, 2009
Very well written assessment of energy choices.
Only recently did I discover that 20% of power sent is lost in transmission. Imagine all the fuel and waste that does no good for anyone. Logically speaking,coal waste will soon be labled "toxic" and result in higher cost for handling and storage. Not to mention damage to an individual's health.

To factor in such costs as maintaining power lines,poles, right of ways, storm damage, etc. would make it a difficult task to arrive at an accurate cost per watt figure. Management, accounting, payroll, vehicles and on-and-on certainly make a strong case for "point of use" power. The billing of customers alone is a monumental cost.

Has anyone, other than myself, considered future generations labeling us as fools for risking lives digging in the ground, to retrive fuel that hurts our atmosphere and leaves toxic waste? I can almost hear laughter as they point to the sun and say, "maybe they didn't notice."

I do hope they realize that greed is strong motivation.
Jim Lindsey
Comment 11 of 12
No image available
Anonymous
November 18, 2009
In comment #11 Jimbox writes: "Only recently did I discover that 20% of power sent is lost in transmission. "

This is a vast overestimate. Transmission losses are about 7%.
Steven
Comment 12 of 12
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
OutBack Power Systems PVPowered Inc. Blue Sky Energy, Inc. The Wall Street Green Trading Summit IX Standard Solar Inc. Sustainable Energy Fund
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo