|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1110
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:03 pm Post subject: Energy Futures - Solar, Wind, Renewable, Fossil... |
    |
|
Since a significant portion of overall energy consumption occurs in the occupancy and production of buildings, and because current human energy consumption patterns threaten the stability of the global biosphere, architects and related design professionals have an ethical stake in energy futures.
Here's a senario that looks pretty well thought out for a practical, gradual transition to a more safe and sustainable world production and consumption model for electricity:
From: http://en.solargeneration.de/index.php/spaces/DisplaySpace?id=104
"There is more than sufficient solar radiation available around the world to satisfy a vastly increased demand for solar power systems. The proportion of the sun’s rays which reaches the earth’s surface is enough to provide for global energy consumption 10,000 times over. On average, each square metre of land is exposed to enough sunlight to produce 1,700 kWh of power every year.
"The statistical information base for the solar energy resource is equally solid. The US National Solar Radiation database, for example, has logged 30 years of solar radiation and supplementary meteorological data from 237 sites in the USA.The greater the available solar resource at a given location the larger the quantity of electricity generated. Tropical regions offer a better resource than more temperate latitudes. The average irradiation in Europe is about 1,000 kWh per square metre, for example, compared with 1,800 kWh in the Middle East.Figure 1.2 shows the estimated potential energy output from solar PV generators in different parts of the world.
"The calculation used here takes into account the average efficiency of modules and converters as well as the correct angle to the sun required at different latitudes.In terms of final demand, the report “Solar Electricity in 2010” (European Photovoltaic Industry Association, 2001) shows that the market segment grid-connected PV rooftop systems, the most dynamic growth area in the market, has the potential to generate an average of 16% of electricity consumption across the OECD (industrialised) countries. This is about the same as today’s contribution from hydro power."
From: http://en.solargeneration.de/index.php/pages/DisplayPage?id=274 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Donald
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Posts: 493
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The proportion of the sun’s rays which reaches the earth’s surface is enough to provide for global energy consumption 10,000 times over. On average, each square metre of land is exposed to enough sunlight to produce 1,700 kWh of power every year. |
Not sure about the validity of those calculations, and whether global change conditions has any adverse effect on the total consumption loads, so I take them for what you show KM, and enough said there.
This BBC article explains how the UK tried to get the population involved in setting solar panel cells on their homes and offered up a 50% gov't incentive for anyone who wanted to purchase them, starting about 3 years back:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/moneybox/2002080.stm
From what I can tell, the payback amount over time may not have been sufficient for the individual to go for it, and it almost reads as if complaints about only "environmental benefits" were all that one would truely receive from such a limited program.
I wonder how successful this program went during these past three years and what the participation in the program amounted to of the 3000 grants offered? I also wonder how many would take advantage in such a program if the governments of all nations simply gave away the solar panels and allowed the homeowner to simply have them installed? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Architorture
millennium club
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Posts: 1376
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
in climates such as the UK and the US far more interest should probably just be put towards reducing the need for heating and cooling loads in homes throughout the year...
electric resistance home or water heating uses up alot of electricity. even if you are using a PV system, by reducing your consumption in those areas you could ease the pressure on the PV system, considering all the other power hungry appliances in a modern home
so in that respect it would be nice to see more interest in further developing passive heating and cooling systems and solar water heating, which could resolves some of these needs for less money than a system entirely dependant on PVs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1110
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, there are several articles on the web exploring why the UK is so far behind comparable European neighbors in PV development, and looking into the specific flaws in their incentive programs.
It does make so much sense to conserve first - the paybacks for first-order conservation can blow away almost any production-side alternatives.
And similarly, I agree about using solar energy input as heat, where possible, with good passive building design, with sophisitcated fine-grain environmental control systems (see article in tomorrow's AW, for example), and with active heat collection systems.
I live in one of what I guess are relatively few cities in the U.S. with solar access requirements in the development code (though such requirements are widespread and much more sophisticated in Japan, for instance).
The point is to try to place new houses in multi-lot developments such that solar access is retained for as many houses as reasonably possible. Without such codes, many dwellings will lose passive solar capabilities just by default.
And there are tons of exemptions, so the code virtually never keeps a house from being built - just exerts some discipline on where to put the ones intended.
But the local chamber of commerce and homebuilders association don't want to be bothered with anything that looks like a restriction, so there's constant pressure to relax interpretations and amend more exemptions into the code. Monday lunchtime I spoke to our planning commission against a city staff recommendation to simply exempt all houses on slopes of 20% slopes or more - representing quite a few of our building sites in my hilly neighborhood - because it's apparently too hard for them to keep track of the orientation of the hillside.
An architect on the planning commission did respond to my comments by speaking up for retaining the standard in a simplified form, so it looks like there will be a compromise on this one.
Pretty hard to take advantage of passive solar if you can't bother to see which way's north!
Time for a culture-change, anyone? Maybe a little more evolution? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDR
millennium club
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 1712
Location: San Francisco
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can lead a horse's-ass to water, but you can't make him think. . .
Or can you. . .? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donald
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Posts: 493
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | why the UK is so far behind comparable European neighbors in PV development |
I'd like to read RH's take on this one....if he's listening. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Haut
millennium club
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 1135
Location: Nice, France
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Back in 1978 I wrote an article (in Britain) about a French priest who came up with the idea of a solar oven and kiln for use in the Sahel (southern Sahara).
The point being that interest in PV in Britain was quite strong at that time. The difficulty was, as elsewhere, the initial panels used in domestic housing were expensive and not especially efficient.
So why has the initial interest not progressed.
That is complicated. Although the architectural profession has always been forward-looking, the construction and even development industries are backward looking and do not like new ideas. Housing in Britain is a commodity - using green ideas to sell a house is not likely to be a major consideration. My guess is that it would still be seen as freaky - as a hippy idea.
Notions of environmental consciousness - efficiency in energy production, use and management are viewed quite differently on the continent - with perhaps the Scandinavians in the lead.
The result is that architects particularly are strong in trying to put forward environmental quality in design in Britain - but getting anything to happen is very slow and difficult.
Not a complete answer, but I think that that is the source of the problem.
_________________
Richard Haut has worked with the architectural profession for over 25 years and produces the weekly Richard Haut's Competitions, which has given architects details of many thousands of projects for which they can apply across Britain and Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
