Six Easy Steps to Estimate Cost of a Solar Power System
Cooler Planet asked:
Solar power energy systems are not inexpensive. That said it’s important to compare them within context of other types of home improvement projects. Home buyers and realtors view a solar photovoltaic or solar hot water heating system as a significant value-added improvement – similar to adding a deck or remodeling your kitchen. Plus unlike a deck or kitchen remodel, you also gain one-up on your power bills. Here are some foolproof ways to estimate the cost of a solar photovoltaic or solar thermal system and to figure out if a solar energy system makes sense for you.
Six Easy Steps To Estimate Cost of a Solar Power System
Solar power energy systems are not inexpensive. That said it’s important to compare them within context of other types of home improvement projects. Home buyers and realtors view a solar photovoltaic or solar hot water heating system as a significant value-added improvement – similar to adding a deck or remodeling your kitchen. Plus unlike a deck or kitchen remodel, you also gain one-up on your power bills.
Solar power systems often get an additional financial boost as well: many jurisdictions and utilities across the USA offer attractive financial incentives to drive down the upfront capital costs associated with a solar power system.
Here are some foolproof ways to estimate the cost of a solar photovoltaic or solar thermal system and to figure out if a solar energy system makes sense for you. Let’s start with a home photovoltaic (PV) system.
Step 1: Estimate your home’s electricity needs
To get started, it’s good to have a sense of how much electricity you use. You’ll have a better point for comparison if you find out how many kilowatt hours (kWh) you use per day, per month, per year. Your utility bill should include that information.
Of course, the utility bill will also display your costs and many utilities include a graph that displays how your monthly energy use/cost varies throughout the year. That helps you estimate where your highest energy use is and at what time of year.
New Home Construction
If you are constructing a new home, then you’ll need to estimate your demand based on the type of equipment you plan to install and your home’s square footage. The pross call this “your load”.
To figure out your anticipated load, create a table to record the watt use for each appliance. Each appliance – be it a water heater, electric light, computer, or refrigerator – should have a nameplate that lists its power rating in watts. Or you can get the information from the manufacturer’s website.
Some labels list amperage and voltage only; to obtain watts multiply the two together (amperage x voltage = watts). In another column, record the number of hours each appliance is expected to operate. Then multiple the watts and hours together to estimate watt-hours used per day. Since it’s hard to anticipate all electric loads (it may get tedious scouting out every toothbrush and mobile phone cell charger), you might want to add a multiplier of 1.5 to be safe.
Step 2: Anticipate the future
In 2005, average residential electricity rates across the USA ranged from about 6 to nearly 16 cents per kilowatt hour depending on where you lived. Average retail and commercial electricity rates have increased roughly 30% since 1999 and the upward trend will likely continue especially as costs for the coal and hydropower used to generate that electricity rise as well. So think about your home electricity needs and present and future cost in relation to one another.
Step 3: How much sun do you get?
The Florida Solar Energy Center has conducted a study to examine how a 2-kW photovoltaic system would perform if installed on a highly energy efficient home across the continental USA (http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/publications/html/FSEC-PF-380-04/).
The study accounted for all factors that impact a PV system’s performance such as the temperature effect on the photovoltaic cells, the amount of sun peak hours in various regions, and the efficiency of inverter to convert solar derived energy from DC to AC.
As the study implies, solar photovoltaic systems work just about anywhere in the US. Even in the Northeast or in “rainy Seattle”, a pv system can pencil out if designed and installed properly. In New York or New Jersey, a one kilowatt system should produce about 1270 kilowatt hours of electricity per year, in Seattle, a one kilowatt system should produce about 1200 kilowatt hours per year. In the Southwest, of course, those ratios will be much greater.
Solar contractors in your area can help determine the best size for your solar photovoltaic system.
Step 4: Size your system
In general, solar photovoltaic systems sized between 1 to 5 kilowatts are usually sufficient to meet the electricity needs of most homes. One advantage of grid-tied systems is that you can use solar PV to supplement or offset some of your electricity needs; therefore you can size your system to match your budget and always add to the system later if needed.
Also as a side note, here’s a rule of thumb to remember to help you estimate the physical space your PV system might need: one square foot yields 10 watts. So in bright sunlight, a square foot of a conventional photovoltaic panel will produce 10 watts of power. A 1000 watt system, for example, may need 100 – 200 square feet of area, depending on the type of PV module used.
Step 5: Know your rebates
Many states and local jurisdictions offer rebates, tax credits and other types of incentives to homeowners for installing residential photovoltaic and solar domestic water systems. To view a comprehensive database of the incentives available for renewable energy visit http://www.dsireusa.org.
At the Federal Level, you can take advantage of a 30% tax credit (of up to $2,000) for the purchase of a residential solar system at least until December 31, 2008.
Step 6: Run the numbers
Although the cost for a solar PV system will depend on the size of the system you intend to install, your electricity rate, the amount of kilowatt hours you expect to generate, and the state/local rebates/tax credits that may be available, the formulas for calculating the returns are pretty much the same.
For those who appreciate having the formulas, use the ones listed below to do a quick ballpark estimate of how much a solar photovoltaic system might cost you.
Retail Price for Solar Photovoltaic System
+ Building Permits
- $2,000 Federal Tax Credit
- State or Local Tax Credit or Rebate
- Utility Rebate or Other Incentive
= Net Investment
Kilowatts of electricity generated from PV per year
x Kilowatt hours used per year
= Annual Kilowatt energy from the PV system
Annual Kilowatt energy from the PV system
x Current Residential Electricity Rate
= Annual $$ Saved
Yearly Excess PV Energy Produced
x $$ credit applied per watt
= Annual Value from Net Metering
Of course, a more accurate assessment can be made by a pro. Work with a solar power contractor to size and price the right system for you. As is true with any major purchase, don’t hesitate to ask for several bids from different contractors.
Many solar power providers will provide you with a comprehensive estimate. Helpful information to know includes:
- Total cost to make the system operational (labor cost for design and installation and equipment costs)
- Equipment (Make and Model)
- Warranty info
- Permit costs, if needed
- Tax, where applicable
- Federal tax credits
- State or local jurisdiction tax credits or rebates
- Utility rebates
- Expected Renewable Energy Certificates or Net metering credits
- Expected operation and maintenance costs
- Projected savings
Solar Thermal (also called Solar Hot Water)
Solar thermal systems capture the sun’s energy to heat water and are one of the most cost-effective renewable energy systems. They are used to heat hot water tanks and/or a heating system. A solar pool heating system is another type of solar thermal system designed specifically to heat a pool or hot tub.
Generally it’s worth investigating the economic viability of installing a solar hot water system if you have an electric water heater with utility rates of at least 5 cents per kilowatt hour and have tax credits or rebates available. (It may even be worth changing out a gas-powered water heater if your costs are at least $8/million BTU).
The formulas for costing out a solar water heater system are similar to estimating the cost for installing solar PV system. Many solar energy professionals can help you determine what system might work best for you.
Heating Your Swimming Pool with Solar Power
Although few jurisdictions provide financial incentives for using solar energy to heat a swimming pool or hot tub, in general, using solar power to heat your pool is a “no-brainer” from a return on investment standpoint.
The electricity used to heat a pool during the swimming season often amounts to the same amount of energy that homes-without-pools consume over a year. Combining a solar thermal system to generate heat for the pool with a solar thermal pool cover to retain the heat generated can further maximize efficiencies and extend your swimming season.
Most installers recommend that a solar collector used to heat a pool is sized at roughly half the square footage of your pool surface area. Solar thermal panels typically last 10 – 20 years and come with a 10-year warranty.
How long it takes to break even on the cost of your solar power pool system depends on where you live. In California or other parts of the Southwest, you’ll break even in 1 to 3 years but places as “far north” as Canada, a solar pool heating system pencils out over a slightly longer period of time.
Solar power energy systems are not inexpensive. That said it’s important to compare them within context of other types of home improvement projects. Home buyers and realtors view a solar photovoltaic or solar hot water heating system as a significant value-added improvement – similar to adding a deck or remodeling your kitchen. Plus unlike a deck or kitchen remodel, you also gain one-up on your power bills. Here are some foolproof ways to estimate the cost of a solar photovoltaic or solar thermal system and to figure out if a solar energy system makes sense for you.
Six Easy Steps To Estimate Cost of a Solar Power System
Solar power energy systems are not inexpensive. That said it’s important to compare them within context of other types of home improvement projects. Home buyers and realtors view a solar photovoltaic or solar hot water heating system as a significant value-added improvement – similar to adding a deck or remodeling your kitchen. Plus unlike a deck or kitchen remodel, you also gain one-up on your power bills.
Solar power systems often get an additional financial boost as well: many jurisdictions and utilities across the USA offer attractive financial incentives to drive down the upfront capital costs associated with a solar power system.
Here are some foolproof ways to estimate the cost of a solar photovoltaic or solar thermal system and to figure out if a solar energy system makes sense for you. Let’s start with a home photovoltaic (PV) system.
Step 1: Estimate your home’s electricity needs
To get started, it’s good to have a sense of how much electricity you use. You’ll have a better point for comparison if you find out how many kilowatt hours (kWh) you use per day, per month, per year. Your utility bill should include that information.
Of course, the utility bill will also display your costs and many utilities include a graph that displays how your monthly energy use/cost varies throughout the year. That helps you estimate where your highest energy use is and at what time of year.
New Home Construction
If you are constructing a new home, then you’ll need to estimate your demand based on the type of equipment you plan to install and your home’s square footage. The pross call this “your load”.
To figure out your anticipated load, create a table to record the watt use for each appliance. Each appliance – be it a water heater, electric light, computer, or refrigerator – should have a nameplate that lists its power rating in watts. Or you can get the information from the manufacturer’s website.
Some labels list amperage and voltage only; to obtain watts multiply the two together (amperage x voltage = watts). In another column, record the number of hours each appliance is expected to operate. Then multiple the watts and hours together to estimate watt-hours used per day. Since it’s hard to anticipate all electric loads (it may get tedious scouting out every toothbrush and mobile phone cell charger), you might want to add a multiplier of 1.5 to be safe.
Step 2: Anticipate the future
In 2005, average residential electricity rates across the USA ranged from about 6 to nearly 16 cents per kilowatt hour depending on where you lived. Average retail and commercial electricity rates have increased roughly 30% since 1999 and the upward trend will likely continue especially as costs for the coal and hydropower used to generate that electricity rise as well. So think about your home electricity needs and present and future cost in relation to one another.
Step 3: How much sun do you get?
The Florida Solar Energy Center has conducted a study to examine how a 2-kW photovoltaic system would perform if installed on a highly energy efficient home across the continental USA (http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/publications/html/FSEC-PF-380-04/).
The study accounted for all factors that impact a PV system’s performance such as the temperature effect on the photovoltaic cells, the amount of sun peak hours in various regions, and the efficiency of inverter to convert solar derived energy from DC to AC.
As the study implies, solar photovoltaic systems work just about anywhere in the US. Even in the Northeast or in “rainy Seattle”, a pv system can pencil out if designed and installed properly. In New York or New Jersey, a one kilowatt system should produce about 1270 kilowatt hours of electricity per year, in Seattle, a one kilowatt system should produce about 1200 kilowatt hours per year. In the Southwest, of course, those ratios will be much greater.
Solar contractors in your area can help determine the best size for your solar photovoltaic system.
Step 4: Size your system
In general, solar photovoltaic systems sized between 1 to 5 kilowatts are usually sufficient to meet the electricity needs of most homes. One advantage of grid-tied systems is that you can use solar PV to supplement or offset some of your electricity needs; therefore you can size your system to match your budget and always add to the system later if needed.
Also as a side note, here’s a rule of thumb to remember to help you estimate the physical space your PV system might need: one square foot yields 10 watts. So in bright sunlight, a square foot of a conventional photovoltaic panel will produce 10 watts of power. A 1000 watt system, for example, may need 100 – 200 square feet of area, depending on the type of PV module used.
Step 5: Know your rebates
Many states and local jurisdictions offer rebates, tax credits and other types of incentives to homeowners for installing residential photovoltaic and solar domestic water systems. To view a comprehensive database of the incentives available for renewable energy visit http://www.dsireusa.org.
At the Federal Level, you can take advantage of a 30% tax credit (of up to $2,000) for the purchase of a residential solar system at least until December 31, 2008.
Step 6: Run the numbers
Although the cost for a solar PV system will depend on the size of the system you intend to install, your electricity rate, the amount of kilowatt hours you expect to generate, and the state/local rebates/tax credits that may be available, the formulas for calculating the returns are pretty much the same.
For those who appreciate having the formulas, use the ones listed below to do a quick ballpark estimate of how much a solar photovoltaic system might cost you.
Retail Price for Solar Photovoltaic System
+ Building Permits
- $2,000 Federal Tax Credit
- State or Local Tax Credit or Rebate
- Utility Rebate or Other Incentive
= Net Investment
Kilowatts of electricity generated from PV per year
x Kilowatt hours used per year
= Annual Kilowatt energy from the PV system
Annual Kilowatt energy from the PV system
x Current Residential Electricity Rate
= Annual $$ Saved
Yearly Excess PV Energy Produced
x $$ credit applied per watt
= Annual Value from Net Metering
Of course, a more accurate assessment can be made by a pro. Work with a solar power contractor to size and price the right system for you. As is true with any major purchase, don’t hesitate to ask for several bids from different contractors.
Many solar power providers will provide you with a comprehensive estimate. Helpful information to know includes:
- Total cost to make the system operational (labor cost for design and installation and equipment costs)
- Equipment (Make and Model)
- Warranty info
- Permit costs, if needed
- Tax, where applicable
- Federal tax credits
- State or local jurisdiction tax credits or rebates
- Utility rebates
- Expected Renewable Energy Certificates or Net metering credits
- Expected operation and maintenance costs
- Projected savings
Solar Thermal (also called Solar Hot Water)
Solar thermal systems capture the sun’s energy to heat water and are one of the most cost-effective renewable energy systems. They are used to heat hot water tanks and/or a heating system. A solar pool heating system is another type of solar thermal system designed specifically to heat a pool or hot tub.
Generally it’s worth investigating the economic viability of installing a solar hot water system if you have an electric water heater with utility rates of at least 5 cents per kilowatt hour and have tax credits or rebates available. (It may even be worth changing out a gas-powered water heater if your costs are at least $8/million BTU).
The formulas for costing out a solar water heater system are similar to estimating the cost for installing solar PV system. Many solar energy professionals can help you determine what system might work best for you.
Heating Your Swimming Pool with Solar Power
Although few jurisdictions provide financial incentives for using solar energy to heat a swimming pool or hot tub, in general, using solar power to heat your pool is a “no-brainer” from a return on investment standpoint.
The electricity used to heat a pool during the swimming season often amounts to the same amount of energy that homes-without-pools consume over a year. Combining a solar thermal system to generate heat for the pool with a solar thermal pool cover to retain the heat generated can further maximize efficiencies and extend your swimming season.
Most installers recommend that a solar collector used to heat a pool is sized at roughly half the square footage of your pool surface area. Solar thermal panels typically last 10 – 20 years and come with a 10-year warranty.
How long it takes to break even on the cost of your solar power pool system depends on where you live. In California or other parts of the Southwest, you’ll break even in 1 to 3 years but places as “far north” as Canada, a solar pool heating system pencils out over a slightly longer period of time.
Chinese steam - QJ 1675 exits power station
qianjin6639 asked:
Note rare high deflectors, eight wheel tender and oldest operating QJ in China. She pulls out a massive train of empty coal hoppers in her final weeks of operation, Mudanjiang - Feb 9 2006.
Nuclear Power Becomes Popular Again
Davinos Greeno asked:
Construction of nuclear power plants declined following the 1986 disaster at Chernobyl. Lately, there has been renewed interest in nuclear energy from national governments, the public, and some notable environmentalists due to increased oil prices, new passively safe designs of plants, and the low emission rate of greenhouse gas which some governments need to meet the standards of the Kyoto Protocol. A few reactors are under construction, and several new types of reactors are planned.
As of 2006 there are 442 licensed nuclear power reactors in operation in the world, operating in 31 different countries. Nuclear power plants currently provide about 17 percent of the world’s electricity, yet how much of the world’s current and future environmental problems does Nuclear Power contribute to? Nuclear power has both powerful enemies and friends but does the bottom line come down to costs? The December 2005 World Nuclear Association report The New Economics of Nuclear Power states that “Nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels”. The need for cheap energy can not be argued when every week price increases are announced from all the gas and electricity suppliers in the UK. The Ukraine recently had their gas supply stopped by Russia, how long is it before this happens to the UK? Do we not need to be self-sufficient when it comes to the generation of power? Can renewable energy not begin to take a larger role in this supply? See GuideMeGreens green directory for renewable energy companies and recycled products in the UK.
The report goes on to say that fuel costs for nuclear plants are a minor proportion of total generating costs, though capital costs are greater than those for coal-fired plants. At the NIA 2006 launch of the Commission’s position paper on the role of nuclear it confirmed “that nuclear is a low carbon technology with an impressive safety record in the UK” and “Nuclear could generate large quantities of electricity, contribute to stabilising CO2 emissions and add to the diversity of the UK’s energy supply.” While we have an impressive record of safety in the UK, Chernobyl has proved that a nuclear accident thousands of miles away can effect the UK for decades to come. The Tsunami also caused problems at Nuclear Power plants around Asia as the plants are built near the sea due to the large amount of water needed to cool the rectors. Greenpeace has always fought vigorously against nuclear power because they believe that it is an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity and that the only solution is to halt the expansion of all nuclear power, and for the shutdown of existing plants.
Construction of nuclear power plants declined following the 1986 disaster at Chernobyl. Lately, there has been renewed interest in nuclear energy from national governments, the public, and some notable environmentalists due to increased oil prices, new passively safe designs of plants, and the low emission rate of greenhouse gas which some governments need to meet the standards of the Kyoto Protocol. A few reactors are under construction, and several new types of reactors are planned.
As of 2006 there are 442 licensed nuclear power reactors in operation in the world, operating in 31 different countries. Nuclear power plants currently provide about 17 percent of the world’s electricity, yet how much of the world’s current and future environmental problems does Nuclear Power contribute to? Nuclear power has both powerful enemies and friends but does the bottom line come down to costs? The December 2005 World Nuclear Association report The New Economics of Nuclear Power states that “Nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels”. The need for cheap energy can not be argued when every week price increases are announced from all the gas and electricity suppliers in the UK. The Ukraine recently had their gas supply stopped by Russia, how long is it before this happens to the UK? Do we not need to be self-sufficient when it comes to the generation of power? Can renewable energy not begin to take a larger role in this supply? See GuideMeGreens green directory for renewable energy companies and recycled products in the UK.
The report goes on to say that fuel costs for nuclear plants are a minor proportion of total generating costs, though capital costs are greater than those for coal-fired plants. At the NIA 2006 launch of the Commission’s position paper on the role of nuclear it confirmed “that nuclear is a low carbon technology with an impressive safety record in the UK” and “Nuclear could generate large quantities of electricity, contribute to stabilising CO2 emissions and add to the diversity of the UK’s energy supply.” While we have an impressive record of safety in the UK, Chernobyl has proved that a nuclear accident thousands of miles away can effect the UK for decades to come. The Tsunami also caused problems at Nuclear Power plants around Asia as the plants are built near the sea due to the large amount of water needed to cool the rectors. Greenpeace has always fought vigorously against nuclear power because they believe that it is an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity and that the only solution is to halt the expansion of all nuclear power, and for the shutdown of existing plants.
Surprise! Coal & Nuclear Power are Keys to Obama’s Energy Plan
Money Morning asked:
[Editor's Note: This is the eighth installment of our “Outlook 2009” series, which looks at the global investing outlook for the New Year.]
President-elect Barack Obama has made no bones about wanting to jump-start the renewable energy markets – pledging $150 billion for the development of biofuels, solar and wind power, other alternative energy sources during his first term.
But what might the new administration mean for more traditional – and more reliable –energy sources?
Oil is always the first energy source to spring to mind. But it’s hardly a solo act – coal and nuclear make up the other two-thirds of the top fuel trio. Coal delivers 50% of U.S. electricity needs, and nuclear power brings another 20% to the table.
The cold truth is that demand for energy of all types – and especially electricity – is going to keep advancing, domestically and worldwide. And developing alternatives to coal and nuclear will take time. For instance, tying wind and solar into the existing power grid will be enormously expensive and is likely to pose massive technical and engineering problems.
In fact, according to the International Energy Agency, renewable energy isn’t likely to make a meaningful dent in meeting the world’s energy needs before 2030, if then.
And regardless where the power comes from, our appetite for electricity will continue to skyrocket. Across the planet, overall electricity consumption is expected to double by 2030, increasing by 17 trillion kilowatt hours. While electricity demand will “only” increase by 50% in the U.S. market by 2030, demand will increase 400% in China and six-fold in India.
Our research indicates that President Obama will have very little flexibility in solving our short-term energy problems once he’s sworn into office next month. While he may prefer the environmentally friendly alternatives, most of those replacements are far from fully developed.
The bottom line: Obama’s apparent preference for renewable energy aside, coal and nuclear power are fully deployed, and in widespread use, meaning they’ll remain the backbone of our energy sector in the New Year – and for years to come.
Even so, it’s well worth factoring in all the possible players as we examine energy-sector outlook – and the accompanying potential profit plays – for the next 12 months.
King Coal Reigns Supreme
When it comes to future energy profits for investors, coal and nuclear will continue to be the “dream team” for years to come. Coal will provide the answer to our short-term and intermediate energy needs. It’s plentiful, it’s cheaper than other available alternatives, and a big percentage of the world’s power plants burn it.
Nuclear power offers a long-term solution to energy shortages and a clean solution to global warming, as well. Uranium-fueled nuclear plants are cheap to operate, can run for long periods without refueling, and cause little pollution.
While there is widespread distaste for coal-fired power plants that spew billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other pollutants into the air, there’s no doubt coal will continue to be the dominant player in the electricity game for some time to come.
A full 50% of the electricity U.S. consumers use is generated by coal, and coal is king in the rest of the world, as well. According to the IEA, coal accounted for 42% of all worldwide electricity consumption in 2005.
But get this – the agency predicts coal use will explode by 73% over the next 20 years. That’s the largest projected percentage increase of all energy sources.
As you might suspect, China and India use 45% of world’s coal and will be responsible for 80% of that increase. China, alone, uses more coal than the United States, Japan and Europe combined. China is utterly dependent on coal to run its factories and assembly plants, with coal supplying 80% of its electricity. The Red Dragon also is the world’s top producer of steel, a process that’s also a big burner of coal.
But while China is coal’s largest consumer and producer, the United States controls 27% of the world’s proven reserves, the biggest-single percentage on the planet. That puts this country front and center on the worldwide coal stage, and President-elect Obama’s energy policy in the spotlight.
The president plays a pivotal role in shaping the nation’s energy policy, naming top officials at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Obama has proposed an economy-wide cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. His system – which would set an overall emissions limit, then require polluters to buy allowances at public auction – would increase electricity rates and discourage coal consumption in the U.S. market. President-elect Obama even has stated that any utilities building coal-fired plants could go bankrupt buying pollution allowances.
And on Capitol Hill, newly emboldened Democrats recently tackled global warming and other environmental problems by choosing Sen. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to head the House of Representative’s Energy and Commerce panel. Waxman has already signed onto legislation that would ban any new coal-fired power plants that aren’t built using new technologies that capture carbon dioxide and store it underground, a key part of the Obama energy plan.
Luke Popovich, a spokesman for the National Mining Association, said he believes Obama will be pragmatic about the need to keep coal in the nation’s energy mix.
“He presumably would be sensitive to the impacts of energy policies given the perilous state of the economy,” Popovich said.
But while U.S. utilities may eventually be forced to tighten emissions rules and increase rates, Obama’s renewable energy plans will have very little impact on U.S. coal producers in the near future.
The world needs coal. We have it. And we’re going to sell it.
In the first half of 2008, U.S. coal exports increased by 13 million short tons, or 50%, over first-half 2007 shipments, according to the IEA. Strong global demand for coal, combined with supply disruptions in several key coal exporting countries (Australia, South Africa and China), were the primary factors behind the increase.
But lately, coal prices, along with the prices of other fossil fuels, have suffered from the global economic crisis, and from a resurgent U.S. dollar. An 80% decline in global shipping rates has also fostered competition from other exporters, like Australia, which can now ship farther and compete with U.S. exporters.
As a result, the price of Appalachian Coal on the New York Mercantile Exchange (CME) has fallen to less than $80 a ton from $143 in July.
This will have a negative impact on coal producers until the world economy is able to gather itself back up and build up a new head of steam.
But don’t expect the slump to last long. China’s economy is getting a shot in the arm from a gigantic $586 billion stimulus package, cementing growth expectations for 2009. Expect U.S.exports to accelerate when that kicks in, probably in the second half of 2009.
Since the stock market usually leads economic indicators by six-to-nine months, right now is a good time to be looking at candidates for your investing dollar. But you should be cautious about pulling the trigger. Watch construction activity in China – especially steel demand in the late spring – for the first signs of a rebound in coal prices.
When you think things are ready to take off, Peabody Energy Corp. (BTU) and Arch Coal Inc. (ACI) – the largest U.S. producers – are worth a look. For those who like to play a basket of shares, the Market Vectors Coal exchange traded fund (KOL), or ETF, provides the desired diversification. All three securities are trading at discounts of at least 80% from their July highs, and currently trade at bargain basement multiples.
If you want a coal play that bets directly on China, Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald likes Yanzhou Coal Mining Co. Ltd. (ADR: YZC), one of China’s biggest coal suppliers. It produces lots of high-grade, low-sulfur coal, which burns cleaner and therefore fetches a premium price. The company boasts profit margins of 22%, when the industry averages half that. The company profits are up a blistering 364% in the year’s first three quarters, compared with a year ago. The stock trades at only three times earnings and has a dividend yield of 4.3%.
Nuclear Power: It Struggles in the U.S., but Thrives Abroad
Nuclear power is attractive to the energy industry because it produces electricity on a predictable, 24-hour basis – earning it the industry sobriquet of “base load” power. Coal and hydroelectric plants are the only other power sources that also rate that label. Such alternatives as wind, solar or biofuels do not.
During its term, the Bush administration tried to spark a “renaissance” in the construction of nuclear power plants. And during his presidential campaign, Sen. John McCain stood firmly behind the industry’s hopes of building 45 new reactors by 2030.
Interest in new types of reactors seemed to hint at least at the beginnings of a new start. But President-elect Obama has been lukewarm on nuclear. He acknowledges that nuclear is one of several viable components of the nation’s energy portfolio – the current 104-plant fleet provides 20% of America’s electricity – but has questioned its safety while emphasizing a need to diversify the nation’s energy mix with more wind, solar and other renewable sources.
“That’s sort of like my wife saying she’d support divorce under certain situations,” says William Kovacs, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s vice president of environment, technology, and public affairs.
In fact, the Barack Obama/Joe Biden New Energy for America Plan, while recognizing that nukes provide 70% of our non-carbon-generated electricity, says that “before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage and proliferation.” It goes on to say that the team of President-elect Obama and incoming Vice President Joe Biden “do not believe that Yucca Mountain is a suitable site as a long-term repository for spent nuclear designed for long-term storage. In any case, the earliest the storage site could open would be 2017, and that was before Republicans lost control of the Senate.
With Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., firmly opposed to nuclear waste storage in his home state – and with the Obama administration ready to hold the industry’s feet to the regulatory fire – any plans to expand the nuclear industry in the United States now face a high hurdle.
But nuclear proponents are hardly impotent. The Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s most powerful lobbying group, helped craft the Energy Policy Act of 2005 with more than $12 billion in subsidies for nukes.
Maintaining nuclear energy’s current 20% share of generation would require building three reactors every two years starting in 2016, based on U.S. Department of Energy forecasts. Right now, some 17 companies and consortia are pursuing licenses for more than 30 nuclear power plants with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
But the last operating license for a nuclear plant in the United States was issued in 1978, and the approval process takes a minimum of 24 months after site approval, which can take years. Expect lots of public comment and infighting in Washington, as applications wind their way through the approval process at the NRC.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world is racing ahead with plans to up the ante in the nuclear power game. There are currently 440 nuclear reactors in 31 countries that generate about 16% of the world’s electricity.
Uranium-fueled nuclear energy is rapidly gaining global acceptance as a clean, reliable alternative to such dirty-burning fossil fuels as coal and oil. In a twin bid to combat global warming and keep up with soaring demand for electricity, countries are rushing to build nuclear power plants. Under current projections, 630 reactors will be operating in 55 countries by 2030.
It’s the new technologies those reactors are designed around that are aimed at allaying the public’s perception about the safety of nuclear power. Toshiba Plant & System Services, which has built 112 plants in the past 12 years (more than any other company), is working on a “mininuke,” according to Forbes magazine. Called the “4S” (short for Super-Safe, Small and Simple), it uses a bath of molten sodium to produce steam twice as hot as steam from water-cooled reactors. The 4S can crank out as much as 50 megawatts of power, easily enough to fire up a small factory, or to service an entire town that’s located off the main power grid.
On top of that, the mininuke can go 30 years without refueling, as opposed to typical reactors, which must be fed every 18 months. And the 4S will be safer, because the reactor core is deep underground, well protected against a terrorist attack or earthquakes.
China and South Africa are working on so-called “pebble-bed reactors,” one version of which is filled with 100,000 billiard-ball-sized spheres of coated uranium that are cooled by helium. That eliminates the need for enormous pressurized water-cooling systems and million-dollar containment domes, making them virtually meltdown-proof.
U.S. firms are also on the trail of smaller and safer designs. A Santa Fe, NM company called Hyperion Power Generation Inc., is working on a hot-tub sized design, which eliminates the need for the notoriously unstable uranium control rods. U.S. giant General Electric Co. (GE) is working on new, more efficient designs, as well.
No matter how you slice it, the fuel for the reactors in those plants all depend on a scarce commodity – uranium. Flat out, there’s just not enough “yellow cake” to go around. It takes seven to 10 years to transform a uranium discovery into a fully operational mine. With that kind of lag time, it’s clearly almost impossible for supply to keep up with demand.
Until recently, the market reflected the scarcity, rising as high as $137 a pound in 2007. But lately, despite the global shortages, uranium prices – in sympathy with other commodity prices – have nosedived.
Prices have fallen 40% this year, leading to a sharp decline in the share prices of mining companies, and eviscerating the financing for extraction projects. In the last month alone, six uranium mines in western Colorado and Utah were either put on hold or closed.
Some experts lay the blame for this current credit squeeze squarely at the feet of hedge funds – who they blame for buying up uranium – and banks no longer willing to lend money.
“Hedge funds were selling off their uranium to raise cash, and the prices just plunged,” said George E.L. Glasier, chief executive officer of Energy Fuels Inc., a Canadian junior miner that recently put a Colorado mine project on hold as part of a “capital preservation” strategy brought on by the credit crunch.
Uranium prices fell to $75 early this year, and fell as low as $44 this fall. The spot price now is $55.
With the worldwide growth in the industry – and a classic supply/demand imbalance in the making – someone is eventually going to have to pay the price. History shows when uranium prices move higher, uranium stocks almost always hitch a ride North. So when uranium prices advance – most likely to new highs – expect mining stocks to rise in virtual lock step.
But notwithstanding global growth – for now, at least – Obama’s energy plan and the mothballing of mines makes any uranium play a long-term proposition.
Besides Toshiba (PINK:TOSBF), the stocks to consider include Cameco Corp. (CCJ), the largest U.S. producer; and General Electric, which has a presence in the commercial nuclear power market here and overseas. Also, take a look at Rio Tinto PLC (RTP) and BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP), huge international mining firms with large uranium deposits. Each of these firms would stand to reap substantial profits from a resurgent price in yellow cake.
Outlook 2009 – and Beyond
However, regardless of what uranium does, coal is still the 800-pound gorilla in the energy world. In the United States, no matter how lofty our environmental intentions may be, it’s unlikely coal will be regulated out of existence anytime soon. That’s especially true overseas, where coal is playing a crucial role, fueling the transformation of such countries as China and India from “emerging markets” into first-order powerhouse economies. Given that, the world market simply can’t replace coal anytime soon, either.
As for nuclear power, safety improvements and other technological solutions make nuclear energy a viable energy source for the long term, eventually grabbing a bigger piece of the energy pie – especially overseas.
The bottom line: The economic outlook for both coal and nuclear power is upbeat. Investors might look at both energy plays when considering how to allocate their portfolio – for the New Year and beyond.
[Editor’s Note: Money Morning’s “Outlook 2009” economic forecasting series last looked at the outlook for retail sales in the New Year. Next up: Latin America. Check out past series stories, which have underscored that uncertainty will continue to be the watchword for at least the first part of the New Year. Little wonder, as the global financial crisis continues to whipsaw the U.S. financial markets in a manner that hasn’t been seen since the Great Depression. It’s almost enough to make you surrender. But what if you knew, ahead of time, what marketplace changes to expect? Then you’d be in the driver’s seat – right? You’d know what to anticipate, could craft a profit strategy to follow, and could then just sit back, watching and waiting – and finally profiting from – the very marketplace events you anticipated.
R. Shah Gilani – a retired hedge fund manager and a nationally known expert on the U.S. credit crisis– has predicted five key financial crisis “aftershocks” that he says will create substantial profit opportunities for investors who know just what these aftershocks are, and how to play them. In the Trigger Event Strategist, Gilani describes how investors can use these aftershocks, or “trigger events,” as gateways to massive profits. To find out all about these five financial-crisis aftershocks, and about the trigger-event profit strategy they feed into, check out our latest report.]
To read more click here.
Investment News
[Editor's Note: This is the eighth installment of our “Outlook 2009” series, which looks at the global investing outlook for the New Year.]
President-elect Barack Obama has made no bones about wanting to jump-start the renewable energy markets – pledging $150 billion for the development of biofuels, solar and wind power, other alternative energy sources during his first term.
But what might the new administration mean for more traditional – and more reliable –energy sources?
Oil is always the first energy source to spring to mind. But it’s hardly a solo act – coal and nuclear make up the other two-thirds of the top fuel trio. Coal delivers 50% of U.S. electricity needs, and nuclear power brings another 20% to the table.
The cold truth is that demand for energy of all types – and especially electricity – is going to keep advancing, domestically and worldwide. And developing alternatives to coal and nuclear will take time. For instance, tying wind and solar into the existing power grid will be enormously expensive and is likely to pose massive technical and engineering problems.
In fact, according to the International Energy Agency, renewable energy isn’t likely to make a meaningful dent in meeting the world’s energy needs before 2030, if then.
And regardless where the power comes from, our appetite for electricity will continue to skyrocket. Across the planet, overall electricity consumption is expected to double by 2030, increasing by 17 trillion kilowatt hours. While electricity demand will “only” increase by 50% in the U.S. market by 2030, demand will increase 400% in China and six-fold in India.
Our research indicates that President Obama will have very little flexibility in solving our short-term energy problems once he’s sworn into office next month. While he may prefer the environmentally friendly alternatives, most of those replacements are far from fully developed.
The bottom line: Obama’s apparent preference for renewable energy aside, coal and nuclear power are fully deployed, and in widespread use, meaning they’ll remain the backbone of our energy sector in the New Year – and for years to come.
Even so, it’s well worth factoring in all the possible players as we examine energy-sector outlook – and the accompanying potential profit plays – for the next 12 months.
King Coal Reigns Supreme
When it comes to future energy profits for investors, coal and nuclear will continue to be the “dream team” for years to come. Coal will provide the answer to our short-term and intermediate energy needs. It’s plentiful, it’s cheaper than other available alternatives, and a big percentage of the world’s power plants burn it.
Nuclear power offers a long-term solution to energy shortages and a clean solution to global warming, as well. Uranium-fueled nuclear plants are cheap to operate, can run for long periods without refueling, and cause little pollution.
While there is widespread distaste for coal-fired power plants that spew billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other pollutants into the air, there’s no doubt coal will continue to be the dominant player in the electricity game for some time to come.
A full 50% of the electricity U.S. consumers use is generated by coal, and coal is king in the rest of the world, as well. According to the IEA, coal accounted for 42% of all worldwide electricity consumption in 2005.
But get this – the agency predicts coal use will explode by 73% over the next 20 years. That’s the largest projected percentage increase of all energy sources.
As you might suspect, China and India use 45% of world’s coal and will be responsible for 80% of that increase. China, alone, uses more coal than the United States, Japan and Europe combined. China is utterly dependent on coal to run its factories and assembly plants, with coal supplying 80% of its electricity. The Red Dragon also is the world’s top producer of steel, a process that’s also a big burner of coal.
But while China is coal’s largest consumer and producer, the United States controls 27% of the world’s proven reserves, the biggest-single percentage on the planet. That puts this country front and center on the worldwide coal stage, and President-elect Obama’s energy policy in the spotlight.
The president plays a pivotal role in shaping the nation’s energy policy, naming top officials at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Obama has proposed an economy-wide cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. His system – which would set an overall emissions limit, then require polluters to buy allowances at public auction – would increase electricity rates and discourage coal consumption in the U.S. market. President-elect Obama even has stated that any utilities building coal-fired plants could go bankrupt buying pollution allowances.
And on Capitol Hill, newly emboldened Democrats recently tackled global warming and other environmental problems by choosing Sen. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to head the House of Representative’s Energy and Commerce panel. Waxman has already signed onto legislation that would ban any new coal-fired power plants that aren’t built using new technologies that capture carbon dioxide and store it underground, a key part of the Obama energy plan.
Luke Popovich, a spokesman for the National Mining Association, said he believes Obama will be pragmatic about the need to keep coal in the nation’s energy mix.
“He presumably would be sensitive to the impacts of energy policies given the perilous state of the economy,” Popovich said.
But while U.S. utilities may eventually be forced to tighten emissions rules and increase rates, Obama’s renewable energy plans will have very little impact on U.S. coal producers in the near future.
The world needs coal. We have it. And we’re going to sell it.
In the first half of 2008, U.S. coal exports increased by 13 million short tons, or 50%, over first-half 2007 shipments, according to the IEA. Strong global demand for coal, combined with supply disruptions in several key coal exporting countries (Australia, South Africa and China), were the primary factors behind the increase.
But lately, coal prices, along with the prices of other fossil fuels, have suffered from the global economic crisis, and from a resurgent U.S. dollar. An 80% decline in global shipping rates has also fostered competition from other exporters, like Australia, which can now ship farther and compete with U.S. exporters.
As a result, the price of Appalachian Coal on the New York Mercantile Exchange (CME) has fallen to less than $80 a ton from $143 in July.
This will have a negative impact on coal producers until the world economy is able to gather itself back up and build up a new head of steam.
But don’t expect the slump to last long. China’s economy is getting a shot in the arm from a gigantic $586 billion stimulus package, cementing growth expectations for 2009. Expect U.S.exports to accelerate when that kicks in, probably in the second half of 2009.
Since the stock market usually leads economic indicators by six-to-nine months, right now is a good time to be looking at candidates for your investing dollar. But you should be cautious about pulling the trigger. Watch construction activity in China – especially steel demand in the late spring – for the first signs of a rebound in coal prices.
When you think things are ready to take off, Peabody Energy Corp. (BTU) and Arch Coal Inc. (ACI) – the largest U.S. producers – are worth a look. For those who like to play a basket of shares, the Market Vectors Coal exchange traded fund (KOL), or ETF, provides the desired diversification. All three securities are trading at discounts of at least 80% from their July highs, and currently trade at bargain basement multiples.
If you want a coal play that bets directly on China, Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald likes Yanzhou Coal Mining Co. Ltd. (ADR: YZC), one of China’s biggest coal suppliers. It produces lots of high-grade, low-sulfur coal, which burns cleaner and therefore fetches a premium price. The company boasts profit margins of 22%, when the industry averages half that. The company profits are up a blistering 364% in the year’s first three quarters, compared with a year ago. The stock trades at only three times earnings and has a dividend yield of 4.3%.
Nuclear Power: It Struggles in the U.S., but Thrives Abroad
Nuclear power is attractive to the energy industry because it produces electricity on a predictable, 24-hour basis – earning it the industry sobriquet of “base load” power. Coal and hydroelectric plants are the only other power sources that also rate that label. Such alternatives as wind, solar or biofuels do not.
During its term, the Bush administration tried to spark a “renaissance” in the construction of nuclear power plants. And during his presidential campaign, Sen. John McCain stood firmly behind the industry’s hopes of building 45 new reactors by 2030.
Interest in new types of reactors seemed to hint at least at the beginnings of a new start. But President-elect Obama has been lukewarm on nuclear. He acknowledges that nuclear is one of several viable components of the nation’s energy portfolio – the current 104-plant fleet provides 20% of America’s electricity – but has questioned its safety while emphasizing a need to diversify the nation’s energy mix with more wind, solar and other renewable sources.
“That’s sort of like my wife saying she’d support divorce under certain situations,” says William Kovacs, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s vice president of environment, technology, and public affairs.
In fact, the Barack Obama/Joe Biden New Energy for America Plan, while recognizing that nukes provide 70% of our non-carbon-generated electricity, says that “before an expansion of nuclear power is considered, key issues must be addressed including: security of nuclear fuel and waste, waste storage and proliferation.” It goes on to say that the team of President-elect Obama and incoming Vice President Joe Biden “do not believe that Yucca Mountain is a suitable site as a long-term repository for spent nuclear designed for long-term storage. In any case, the earliest the storage site could open would be 2017, and that was before Republicans lost control of the Senate.
With Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., firmly opposed to nuclear waste storage in his home state – and with the Obama administration ready to hold the industry’s feet to the regulatory fire – any plans to expand the nuclear industry in the United States now face a high hurdle.
But nuclear proponents are hardly impotent. The Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s most powerful lobbying group, helped craft the Energy Policy Act of 2005 with more than $12 billion in subsidies for nukes.
Maintaining nuclear energy’s current 20% share of generation would require building three reactors every two years starting in 2016, based on U.S. Department of Energy forecasts. Right now, some 17 companies and consortia are pursuing licenses for more than 30 nuclear power plants with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
But the last operating license for a nuclear plant in the United States was issued in 1978, and the approval process takes a minimum of 24 months after site approval, which can take years. Expect lots of public comment and infighting in Washington, as applications wind their way through the approval process at the NRC.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world is racing ahead with plans to up the ante in the nuclear power game. There are currently 440 nuclear reactors in 31 countries that generate about 16% of the world’s electricity.
Uranium-fueled nuclear energy is rapidly gaining global acceptance as a clean, reliable alternative to such dirty-burning fossil fuels as coal and oil. In a twin bid to combat global warming and keep up with soaring demand for electricity, countries are rushing to build nuclear power plants. Under current projections, 630 reactors will be operating in 55 countries by 2030.
It’s the new technologies those reactors are designed around that are aimed at allaying the public’s perception about the safety of nuclear power. Toshiba Plant & System Services, which has built 112 plants in the past 12 years (more than any other company), is working on a “mininuke,” according to Forbes magazine. Called the “4S” (short for Super-Safe, Small and Simple), it uses a bath of molten sodium to produce steam twice as hot as steam from water-cooled reactors. The 4S can crank out as much as 50 megawatts of power, easily enough to fire up a small factory, or to service an entire town that’s located off the main power grid.
On top of that, the mininuke can go 30 years without refueling, as opposed to typical reactors, which must be fed every 18 months. And the 4S will be safer, because the reactor core is deep underground, well protected against a terrorist attack or earthquakes.
China and South Africa are working on so-called “pebble-bed reactors,” one version of which is filled with 100,000 billiard-ball-sized spheres of coated uranium that are cooled by helium. That eliminates the need for enormous pressurized water-cooling systems and million-dollar containment domes, making them virtually meltdown-proof.
U.S. firms are also on the trail of smaller and safer designs. A Santa Fe, NM company called Hyperion Power Generation Inc., is working on a hot-tub sized design, which eliminates the need for the notoriously unstable uranium control rods. U.S. giant General Electric Co. (GE) is working on new, more efficient designs, as well.
No matter how you slice it, the fuel for the reactors in those plants all depend on a scarce commodity – uranium. Flat out, there’s just not enough “yellow cake” to go around. It takes seven to 10 years to transform a uranium discovery into a fully operational mine. With that kind of lag time, it’s clearly almost impossible for supply to keep up with demand.
Until recently, the market reflected the scarcity, rising as high as $137 a pound in 2007. But lately, despite the global shortages, uranium prices – in sympathy with other commodity prices – have nosedived.
Prices have fallen 40% this year, leading to a sharp decline in the share prices of mining companies, and eviscerating the financing for extraction projects. In the last month alone, six uranium mines in western Colorado and Utah were either put on hold or closed.
Some experts lay the blame for this current credit squeeze squarely at the feet of hedge funds – who they blame for buying up uranium – and banks no longer willing to lend money.
“Hedge funds were selling off their uranium to raise cash, and the prices just plunged,” said George E.L. Glasier, chief executive officer of Energy Fuels Inc., a Canadian junior miner that recently put a Colorado mine project on hold as part of a “capital preservation” strategy brought on by the credit crunch.
Uranium prices fell to $75 early this year, and fell as low as $44 this fall. The spot price now is $55.
With the worldwide growth in the industry – and a classic supply/demand imbalance in the making – someone is eventually going to have to pay the price. History shows when uranium prices move higher, uranium stocks almost always hitch a ride North. So when uranium prices advance – most likely to new highs – expect mining stocks to rise in virtual lock step.
But notwithstanding global growth – for now, at least – Obama’s energy plan and the mothballing of mines makes any uranium play a long-term proposition.
Besides Toshiba (PINK:TOSBF), the stocks to consider include Cameco Corp. (CCJ), the largest U.S. producer; and General Electric, which has a presence in the commercial nuclear power market here and overseas. Also, take a look at Rio Tinto PLC (RTP) and BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP), huge international mining firms with large uranium deposits. Each of these firms would stand to reap substantial profits from a resurgent price in yellow cake.
Outlook 2009 – and Beyond
However, regardless of what uranium does, coal is still the 800-pound gorilla in the energy world. In the United States, no matter how lofty our environmental intentions may be, it’s unlikely coal will be regulated out of existence anytime soon. That’s especially true overseas, where coal is playing a crucial role, fueling the transformation of such countries as China and India from “emerging markets” into first-order powerhouse economies. Given that, the world market simply can’t replace coal anytime soon, either.
As for nuclear power, safety improvements and other technological solutions make nuclear energy a viable energy source for the long term, eventually grabbing a bigger piece of the energy pie – especially overseas.
The bottom line: The economic outlook for both coal and nuclear power is upbeat. Investors might look at both energy plays when considering how to allocate their portfolio – for the New Year and beyond.
[Editor’s Note: Money Morning’s “Outlook 2009” economic forecasting series last looked at the outlook for retail sales in the New Year. Next up: Latin America. Check out past series stories, which have underscored that uncertainty will continue to be the watchword for at least the first part of the New Year. Little wonder, as the global financial crisis continues to whipsaw the U.S. financial markets in a manner that hasn’t been seen since the Great Depression. It’s almost enough to make you surrender. But what if you knew, ahead of time, what marketplace changes to expect? Then you’d be in the driver’s seat – right? You’d know what to anticipate, could craft a profit strategy to follow, and could then just sit back, watching and waiting – and finally profiting from – the very marketplace events you anticipated.
R. Shah Gilani – a retired hedge fund manager and a nationally known expert on the U.S. credit crisis– has predicted five key financial crisis “aftershocks” that he says will create substantial profit opportunities for investors who know just what these aftershocks are, and how to play them. In the Trigger Event Strategist, Gilani describes how investors can use these aftershocks, or “trigger events,” as gateways to massive profits. To find out all about these five financial-crisis aftershocks, and about the trigger-event profit strategy they feed into, check out our latest report.]
To read more click here.
Investment News
Home Solar Power Systems
Anna Williams asked:
Here are some basic facts about solar energy for the home.
A home solar power system has several standard components they are as follows:
* PV Modules or solar panels (to turn solar energy into electricity)
* A charge controller (this is an electrical device that prevents batteries from overcharging and from power running from the batteries into the solar panels).
* Batteries, to store the electricity for night time usage.
* An inverter (an device which changes the electricity created by the solar panels into electricity ready for use in your regular household wall sockets). Solar panels create Direct Current DC and a household runs on A/C Alternating Current.
* In the case of a hybrid home solar system, an automatic switch to get current from the electrical grid, or some other power source such as a generator would be included as well. The advantage of using a hybrid system is that you will not be dependent upon solar energy alone.
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system is sufficient for most households.
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system will provide roughly 1,600 kilowatts per year in a sunny climate (receiving 5.5 hrs of sunlight each day) and about 750 kilowatt hours per year in cloudy climates (receiving 2.5 hours of sunlight each day).
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system is uses about 10-12 solar panels, and requires about 100 square feet of installation area (which could be the roof of your home or a section of land on your property).
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system reduces waste and pollution by about 170 lbs. of coal from being burned, 300 pounds of carbon dioxide from being released into the atmosphere and 105 gallons of water from being consumed each month! A big step toward protecting our environment, in other words.
* With battery back up, a solar energy system can provide electricity day and night, no matter what the weather conditions. Other options, which include back-up generators and grid-tie systems, provide total security.
* On average a 1-kilowatt home solar system takes about 1-2 days to install and costs around US$10,000 (though prices are coming down), but can vary greatly and does not take into account any tax incentives offered by the government for reducing carbon emissions.
* Most systems come with a 5-year warranty, although the solar panels are warranted for 20, and as technology advances some are even coming out with a 30 year warranty.
Here are some basic facts about solar energy for the home.
A home solar power system has several standard components they are as follows:
* PV Modules or solar panels (to turn solar energy into electricity)
* A charge controller (this is an electrical device that prevents batteries from overcharging and from power running from the batteries into the solar panels).
* Batteries, to store the electricity for night time usage.
* An inverter (an device which changes the electricity created by the solar panels into electricity ready for use in your regular household wall sockets). Solar panels create Direct Current DC and a household runs on A/C Alternating Current.
* In the case of a hybrid home solar system, an automatic switch to get current from the electrical grid, or some other power source such as a generator would be included as well. The advantage of using a hybrid system is that you will not be dependent upon solar energy alone.
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system is sufficient for most households.
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system will provide roughly 1,600 kilowatts per year in a sunny climate (receiving 5.5 hrs of sunlight each day) and about 750 kilowatt hours per year in cloudy climates (receiving 2.5 hours of sunlight each day).
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system is uses about 10-12 solar panels, and requires about 100 square feet of installation area (which could be the roof of your home or a section of land on your property).
* A 1-kilowatt home solar system reduces waste and pollution by about 170 lbs. of coal from being burned, 300 pounds of carbon dioxide from being released into the atmosphere and 105 gallons of water from being consumed each month! A big step toward protecting our environment, in other words.
* With battery back up, a solar energy system can provide electricity day and night, no matter what the weather conditions. Other options, which include back-up generators and grid-tie systems, provide total security.
* On average a 1-kilowatt home solar system takes about 1-2 days to install and costs around US$10,000 (though prices are coming down), but can vary greatly and does not take into account any tax incentives offered by the government for reducing carbon emissions.
* Most systems come with a 5-year warranty, although the solar panels are warranted for 20, and as technology advances some are even coming out with a 30 year warranty.
Wind and Solar Power Generation Guide
Ben Dave asked:
By now, it’s painfully obvious that the accompanying increase in energy needs is part and parcel of lifestyle advancement. Fossil fuels, coal and gas cut both ways. While they literally power the world forward, there’s no denying they also constitute environmental, economic and even political problems. It seems like breaking point sooner now rather than later and it’s time we drastically heightened our efforts to make better use of the earth for energy!
Granted, the world has benefited greatly from our traditional sources of energy but the expense of melting ice, withering forests and crazy weather behaviors is hardly what we had bargained for. There’s no easy substitute but that’s no excuse to turn a blind eye on the fact of the situation. Actually, global movements and campaigns have long been underway to circumscribe the ill-effects of energy by-products but alas, with at best, only sporadic success.
Although conservation is without doubt the best way to control our energy consumption, the required discipline and awareness is never going to be inculcated overnight, benefits of contained pollution and lower fuel costs notwithstanding. In parallel with propaganda and other incentives to conserve energy, consumers should also be facilitated to adopt alternative green and renewable sources of energy also.
The cost of energy is high, more than what most people realize. Over and above the monthly bills from the power company, our environment is also deeply at stake. The future of our natural habitat and the continued availability and reserves of fuel also beg profound question marks. Wherever possible, all energy consumers must stand up to be counted because that is the way that the most significant impact can be made.
To this end, renewable energy will sit in aptly. The idea has been around for a while already but back when crude oil price was twenty dollars a barrel and the ozone layer was of interest only to scientists and researchers, it never summoned much attention. Needless to say, the situation is quite different today. Fundamentally, we still have to look to earth for energy and wind and solar power are two clean and limitless contenders. These two forms of power generation have become hugely popular ever since their small-scale DIY versions Wind And Solar Power generators entered the market.
Those who are in search of DIY guides to set up wind and solar power generators in their homes are in luck. Nowadays, you don’t even have to leave home for it as the internet is flush with retailers of such instructional literature. Standards and quality vary greatly so the trick is in selecting the right one. To play safe, subscribe only to those with money-back guarantee, full support and service and free lifetime updates.
By now, it’s painfully obvious that the accompanying increase in energy needs is part and parcel of lifestyle advancement. Fossil fuels, coal and gas cut both ways. While they literally power the world forward, there’s no denying they also constitute environmental, economic and even political problems. It seems like breaking point sooner now rather than later and it’s time we drastically heightened our efforts to make better use of the earth for energy!
Granted, the world has benefited greatly from our traditional sources of energy but the expense of melting ice, withering forests and crazy weather behaviors is hardly what we had bargained for. There’s no easy substitute but that’s no excuse to turn a blind eye on the fact of the situation. Actually, global movements and campaigns have long been underway to circumscribe the ill-effects of energy by-products but alas, with at best, only sporadic success.
Although conservation is without doubt the best way to control our energy consumption, the required discipline and awareness is never going to be inculcated overnight, benefits of contained pollution and lower fuel costs notwithstanding. In parallel with propaganda and other incentives to conserve energy, consumers should also be facilitated to adopt alternative green and renewable sources of energy also.
The cost of energy is high, more than what most people realize. Over and above the monthly bills from the power company, our environment is also deeply at stake. The future of our natural habitat and the continued availability and reserves of fuel also beg profound question marks. Wherever possible, all energy consumers must stand up to be counted because that is the way that the most significant impact can be made.
To this end, renewable energy will sit in aptly. The idea has been around for a while already but back when crude oil price was twenty dollars a barrel and the ozone layer was of interest only to scientists and researchers, it never summoned much attention. Needless to say, the situation is quite different today. Fundamentally, we still have to look to earth for energy and wind and solar power are two clean and limitless contenders. These two forms of power generation have become hugely popular ever since their small-scale DIY versions Wind And Solar Power generators entered the market.
Those who are in search of DIY guides to set up wind and solar power generators in their homes are in luck. Nowadays, you don’t even have to leave home for it as the internet is flush with retailers of such instructional literature. Standards and quality vary greatly so the trick is in selecting the right one. To play safe, subscribe only to those with money-back guarantee, full support and service and free lifetime updates.
Anthracite Coal: Find Trade Partners Today
Jenny asked:
Anthracite coal or any other commodity can be very expensive when bought through third parties. For merchants all around the world trying to sell products efficiently, as well as get a leg up on the competition, one way to do so is with the help of Made in China. Made in China is one of the most popular businesses online that offer merchants around the world the tools and resources to conduct efficient and affordable overseas trade. Here is some more information on how Made in China can assist your business in connecting with suppliers and manufacturers from Asia.
Made in China Can Help Your Business Connect with Trading Partners
Made in China is a business to business, E-commerce marketing platform that connects merchants with suppliers and manufacturers of anthracite coal or almost any other product available. Made in China is not only extremely quick, convenient and easy to use, it also works. Millions of businesses have joined Made in China over the past few years and today, it boasts a current membership that exceeds 5 million. With so many businesses as members, it is easy for almost any company whether it is a one person operation or a multi national corporation to find quality suppliers and manufacturers of the products that they require.
Powerful Tools and Resource at Hand
One of the ways that Made in China can help you find trade partners for anthracite coal or any other product is by the list of powerful tools and resources that they offer. Not only is their B2B E-commerce marketing platform extremely robust, but with other tools that are offered, you can delve deep into a company or a product to ensure that there is a good fit with your needs before you make the first connection. In addition, Made in China is committed to creating a safe, secure and community environment making connecting not only easy, but extremely efficient. Where it used to cost lots of money and time to find and make quality connections, with Made in China, it can now be done in minutes.
Join Made in China for Free
With Made in China, you not only receive a robust marketing platform to make quality connections, but a wide variety of tools to assist you in making your overseas trade productive and affordable. In addition, for those that are looking to trade anthracite coal or almost any other item, Made in China offers premium services such as trade consultancy.
No matter what you are trading, our service can help and today we offer free membership. There has never been a better time to sign up and join Made in China.
(Article source: http://www.madeinchina.com)
Anthracite coal or any other commodity can be very expensive when bought through third parties. For merchants all around the world trying to sell products efficiently, as well as get a leg up on the competition, one way to do so is with the help of Made in China. Made in China is one of the most popular businesses online that offer merchants around the world the tools and resources to conduct efficient and affordable overseas trade. Here is some more information on how Made in China can assist your business in connecting with suppliers and manufacturers from Asia.
Made in China Can Help Your Business Connect with Trading Partners
Made in China is a business to business, E-commerce marketing platform that connects merchants with suppliers and manufacturers of anthracite coal or almost any other product available. Made in China is not only extremely quick, convenient and easy to use, it also works. Millions of businesses have joined Made in China over the past few years and today, it boasts a current membership that exceeds 5 million. With so many businesses as members, it is easy for almost any company whether it is a one person operation or a multi national corporation to find quality suppliers and manufacturers of the products that they require.
Powerful Tools and Resource at Hand
One of the ways that Made in China can help you find trade partners for anthracite coal or any other product is by the list of powerful tools and resources that they offer. Not only is their B2B E-commerce marketing platform extremely robust, but with other tools that are offered, you can delve deep into a company or a product to ensure that there is a good fit with your needs before you make the first connection. In addition, Made in China is committed to creating a safe, secure and community environment making connecting not only easy, but extremely efficient. Where it used to cost lots of money and time to find and make quality connections, with Made in China, it can now be done in minutes.
Join Made in China for Free
With Made in China, you not only receive a robust marketing platform to make quality connections, but a wide variety of tools to assist you in making your overseas trade productive and affordable. In addition, for those that are looking to trade anthracite coal or almost any other item, Made in China offers premium services such as trade consultancy.
No matter what you are trading, our service can help and today we offer free membership. There has never been a better time to sign up and join Made in China.
(Article source: http://www.madeinchina.com)
Greenpeace : Amazing new technology cuts CO2 emissions 99.5%
andypants05 asked:
This new technology converts gases from industries burning fossil fuels into energy. Very cheap, visit www.absalutecology.com for more details.
The technology makes burning coal, oil, rubbish with nearly 0% pollution possible. Recycling has never been a more profitable and environmentaly friendly possiblilty then it is now. Spread the news and avoid a nuclear future. Not excatly sustainable living, but at least we’ll avoid the worst of climate change if we act soon. This technology cleans toxic gasses of impurities such as CO2, SO2, Nitrogen gas, and dust particles. Keeping the air clean at a very low cost.
This video is not directly supported by greenpeace, although its aim is to provide a simlar service as greenpeace, to protect the environment while accomodating the needs of human expansion and growth.
Absalutecology: Creating a solution to the global environmental and economic problem of air pollution.
Webby: http://www.absalutecology.com/
UAE Buildings Without Power - Property Market in Crisis
Nasir asked:
Investors in the UAE property market have been facing some serious frustrations recently, particularly in the northern emirates of Ajman, Ras Al Khaimah and Umm ul Quwain. Ajman has been a particular destination of choice for many Pakistanis who have been attracted by the cheap off-plan property prices and the promise of a residence visa. Now that some of these projects have completed or are nearing completion, they have discovered that they get a 1 year visa which needs to be renewed EACH year at a cost of AED 1,500 (Rs.33000) and even worse, they may not have any electricity in the hot and humid desert climate for several years !!
Thousands of buildings are being constructed in the United Arab Emirates during the current development boom but they have neglected one serious development issue - ELECTRICITY !! Many brand new buildings that have already been completed, stand in darkness while the owners of the apartments in these buildings stand frustrated. Many moved in furniture and belongings expecting the electricity to be connected with a few days but theey are still waiting months later and it seems that the problem will not go away until 2012 at the earliest.
in Umm al Qaiwain, a Dh30-billion project by the Dubai-based developer Tameer, Al Salam City, was put on hold in May due to the shortage of electricity and water. The delay in such a high-profile project, which was believed to have been 70 per cent sold, was a major blow to the emirate.
Safeer Mall, in RAK, which was completed in June, and has the largest hypermarket in the region, remains empty due to the electricity crisis. A spokesman for the mall said they have lost all hope of solving the problem and businesses are starting to withdraw stock.
In RAK alone, 3,532 building permits have been issued. But up to 2,145 buildings in the emirate are still waiting to be connected with electricity, according to the municipality.
In entire districts of Ajman, brand new high-rise towers, finished to perfection, have stood empty for months. At night, occasional lighting powered by generators highlights the idle buildings.
Developers, unable to persuade the federal or municipal authorities to switch the power on, are watching investments running into millions of dirhams show no sign of producing the expected return.
Ajman has signed a $2bn agreement with the Malaysian power producer MMC to build the Gulf’s first coal-powered electricity plant. The project will not be ready until 2012.
It is unlikely that the energy crisis will be resolved before 2013.
Mr Shaban spent millions on setting up business in the Emirate and is now facing ruin and haveing to return to Egypt with nothing and says others are in comparable predicaments. “Many people bought a flat here. They may have bought it for Dh900,000 and now they have had to sell it for Dh500,000.”
Without power, he says, there can be “no life, no development … you are nothing”.
“You can expect this to happen in other countries, but not the UAE,” he added. “How will the development of the city be achieved if all the business people leave? People are already saying there is no power in Ajman, so why are they still giving approval for the buildings?”
Many Pakistanis who invested in the property markets of Dubai, Ajman and Ras Al Khaimah are now dumping their properties at below their purchase prices and are trying to take out whatever they can of their investments. Islamabad is experiencing a resurgence in real estate investment as much of this money s being repatriated to the safety of the federal capital of Pakistan.
Have you bought property in the UAE? Have you been made aware of this situation? Wat are your thoughts on this?
Come and see more related articles
Investors in the UAE property market have been facing some serious frustrations recently, particularly in the northern emirates of Ajman, Ras Al Khaimah and Umm ul Quwain. Ajman has been a particular destination of choice for many Pakistanis who have been attracted by the cheap off-plan property prices and the promise of a residence visa. Now that some of these projects have completed or are nearing completion, they have discovered that they get a 1 year visa which needs to be renewed EACH year at a cost of AED 1,500 (Rs.33000) and even worse, they may not have any electricity in the hot and humid desert climate for several years !!
Thousands of buildings are being constructed in the United Arab Emirates during the current development boom but they have neglected one serious development issue - ELECTRICITY !! Many brand new buildings that have already been completed, stand in darkness while the owners of the apartments in these buildings stand frustrated. Many moved in furniture and belongings expecting the electricity to be connected with a few days but theey are still waiting months later and it seems that the problem will not go away until 2012 at the earliest.
in Umm al Qaiwain, a Dh30-billion project by the Dubai-based developer Tameer, Al Salam City, was put on hold in May due to the shortage of electricity and water. The delay in such a high-profile project, which was believed to have been 70 per cent sold, was a major blow to the emirate.
Safeer Mall, in RAK, which was completed in June, and has the largest hypermarket in the region, remains empty due to the electricity crisis. A spokesman for the mall said they have lost all hope of solving the problem and businesses are starting to withdraw stock.
In RAK alone, 3,532 building permits have been issued. But up to 2,145 buildings in the emirate are still waiting to be connected with electricity, according to the municipality.
In entire districts of Ajman, brand new high-rise towers, finished to perfection, have stood empty for months. At night, occasional lighting powered by generators highlights the idle buildings.
Developers, unable to persuade the federal or municipal authorities to switch the power on, are watching investments running into millions of dirhams show no sign of producing the expected return.
Ajman has signed a $2bn agreement with the Malaysian power producer MMC to build the Gulf’s first coal-powered electricity plant. The project will not be ready until 2012.
It is unlikely that the energy crisis will be resolved before 2013.
Mr Shaban spent millions on setting up business in the Emirate and is now facing ruin and haveing to return to Egypt with nothing and says others are in comparable predicaments. “Many people bought a flat here. They may have bought it for Dh900,000 and now they have had to sell it for Dh500,000.”
Without power, he says, there can be “no life, no development … you are nothing”.
“You can expect this to happen in other countries, but not the UAE,” he added. “How will the development of the city be achieved if all the business people leave? People are already saying there is no power in Ajman, so why are they still giving approval for the buildings?”
Many Pakistanis who invested in the property markets of Dubai, Ajman and Ras Al Khaimah are now dumping their properties at below their purchase prices and are trying to take out whatever they can of their investments. Islamabad is experiencing a resurgence in real estate investment as much of this money s being repatriated to the safety of the federal capital of Pakistan.
Have you bought property in the UAE? Have you been made aware of this situation? Wat are your thoughts on this?
Come and see more related articles
WSOR 1506 on MG&E Coal Tracks at Madison 3/17/2008
HighIronofWisconsin asked:
One of Wisconsin & Southern’s recently aquired ex-Milwaukee Road MP15ACs has just finished switching the Madison Gas & Electric Blount Street coal power plant on some of the last active ex-C&NW industrial trackage left in downtown Madison. Now it is making up the train of outgoing empties and heading back to the yard.
Video by my dad.