The Energy Blog

Bloom Energy Server Revealed -

---

---

VM7MS3RMU35U

Well, the Bloom Box – Now called the Bloom energy server – was formally revealed on Wednesday. Most of the technical details are now on their website. So, naturally, after all my previous commentary, I must comment once more.

It is, indeed a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC). It generates 100 Kilowatts of power. According to the specs it requires 661000 BTUs per hour from the natural gas input (apx 700 Cu Ft). That is 193 KWh worth of Natural Gas in, for 100 kWh out for an efficiency of 51.8 percent (Which is, indeed “greater than” 50% as quoted on the web site).

I assume this is the total efficiency of the unit (including inverter), and, as such, it is a modest increase over other Solid Oxide fuel cell efforts I have seen. Good for them.

It weighs Ten Tons! And, my head weighs as much as I bow it to apologize for a mis-statement in an earlier post. I stated that the device would still need a reformer to produce hydrogen for the fuel cell. For most fuel cells this is true. However, because of the high temperatures a SOFC works at, they can apparently do “self reformation” within the cell itself. A small “pre-reformer” is still necessary, but not all the complexity of a complete steam reformer. I was not aware of this, although apparently to the people who actually design these things, you know, scientists, it is common knowledge. Neither do I know how this process works – yet. But, I do apologize for the inaccuracy.

CO2 emissions are 773 pounds per MWh. A typical coal plant, according to the EIA, emits about 2000 pounds per MWh. So this emits about 1/3 the CO2 of a coal power plant. The same source quotes natural gas turbine plant CO2 emissions at 1300 pounds per MWH, so it is about half as much as those, although I am not sure I quite buy their CO2 emissions number. Since the carbon is not used in the process, I would think it would be closer to the natural gas turbine plant. Still, much less than coal, and I’m no chemist.

One problem with a SOFC is the extreme temperatures they operate at.- up to 1800 degrees F. At those temperatures reliability has been a problem with other designs. There is no mention of this on their web site. Bloom is offering a 10 year guarantee on the units. Time will tell how reliable they are.

So far, so good. But, then, there is a matter of cost. Oh, there is always a rub. No where on their web site can I find information on cost, so I went looking elsewhere. According to an article on Forbes (as well as a couple of others I found), the box costs approximately $700,000. ($7,000 per kW) There are reports that Bloom is hoping to get the cost down to about $2,500 per kW in about five years. That would put the cost of the box at $250,000. Now there are government rebates and subsidies. Especially in California, which is where all of the initial units have been installed. You can read the Forbes article below for info on that.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/25/fuel-cell-costs-technology-ecotech-bloom-energy.html

But, let us look at the economics of the Bloom Energy Server. Specifically as relates to a residence, as their stated goal is to use these to replace the electric grid to homes.

My only reference to the cost of natural gas and electricity is my own residential bills. To Produce 100 kWh of electricity, which at my rate of 8 cents per kWh would cost $8.00, the box requires 6.6 CCF (hundred cubic feet) of gas. That gas, at about $0.90 per CCF delivered would cost me $5.94. So for every 100 kWh of electricity, I would save $2.06. - Stay with me-  I currently average using about 1400 kWh per month. That means I would save $28.84 every month. Or  $346.08 per year getting my power from the Bloom Energy Server rather than staying with the grid. OK, not a lot, but still a savings. So, let’s rip out the grid connection. But wait, there’s more, I have to purchase this thing. And, therein lies a rub or two.

Certainly, I wouldn’t need this big of a unit. However, if I were to replace my electric service with a Bloom Energy server, it would have to supply my entire 200 amp home service. That is 44,000 watts worth. See, while I normally don’t use that much at once, there is the electric stove, water heater, air conditioner, power tools, and they might have to all be on at once. That is why we have the 200 amp service, and since we are replacing the electric grid entirely, we need to replace it’s entire capacity. So, 44 Kilowatts times even his target price of 2,500 per Kilowatt is an $110,000 investment.
I still have to pay for the fuel, so my savings stay the same - $346.08. So, that works out to a Payback (break-even) time of 317 years. Wait, did I do that right, yep. 317 years. For a box guaranteed for 10 years?

That is the rub with completely replacing the electric grid, especially to a home. See, I don’t normally use anywhere near 44,000 watts at once. But, sometimes I do, or at least come close. So, the capacity has to be there for those times. With the electric grid I do not have to purchase ALL that capacity, just what I need at the moment. My capital cost is spread out over all the users. With the Bloom Energy Server (or any other private power plant). I have to make that entire investment up front.

OK, that would be silly. So lets make one more calculation, one closer to reality. Lets stay connected to the grid for those high power times, and we will put in a more reasonably sized Bloom Energy Server to supply my average needs,  Like, say, 2500 watts. Now, the good thing is I can sell excess power back to the grid – store it there if you will -  so that 2500 watts running constantly should just about eliminate my electric bill. I might even make a little extra. Sell it back. But, I still have to pay for the gas, so my actual savings are still $346.08 per year (Minus whatever the electric company charges me just to stay connected). The box costs $6,250. At  $346.00 per year, that payback time is still 18 years. And, what about those days the stove and a/c are running? I may still have to purchase some electricity from the grid. Or, if I get a new Plug In Hybrid, or a hot tub. I will need to purchase the extra power from the grid. I am sure, with subsidies, and proper financing the numbers can work out a bit better, but it is still not a very viable proposition, and we do not know if the box will even last that long, or what maintenance costs are incurred,


Other than the economics, and despite the unwarranted hyperbole, I think Bloom may have a winner here. But are there enough customers? It will not work for a typical home or small business. It may not work for the average factory. It is only going to work, even then with modest savings,  in a place with a steady, continuous and predictable electrical load – like an office building, or a data center… Hmmm.

Previous posts on the bloom energy server:

Bloom energy possible progress or hyperbole or both

Bloom energy and the bloom box cbs 60 minutes coverage

Making oil out of a Sow's rear - converting pig manure to oil.

---

>

---

I just read an enlightening article about a new source of potential energy,  It seems that scientists at the University of Illinois have developed a process for converting raw pig manure into crude oil.  They go on to say that with further development, the process may even yield biodiesel. Now the actual research was published in 2006. It apparently has taken this long for someone to put this newfound technology to use – making roads.

Now, in case you don’t know, let me bring you up to speed on the US pig industry

According to the US Department of Agriculture in 2007 there were 67.8 Million pigs in the United States. On average, those pigs take up space at the rate of about 8.7 per acre. And those pigs produce about 8 pounds of waste a day. That is a lot of pig poop - two and a half tons a year!

This procedure promises to make a half a barrel of oil substitute (21 gallons) per year out of that 8 pounds of daily pig manure using a thermochemical conversion (TCC) process. How much water or energy is involved in the process (and there is some of both) is unclear.

Now, one of the original sub-licensees of the process, Innoventor Inc., a design and engineering company, is going to use the process to make asphalt pavement for a road leading to Six Flags St. Louis.

This is great news. Any waste that can be successfully re-purposed is not only good for recycling, but good for conserving energy. Not a whole bunch, but, hey, it all counts.

According to the researchers, each pig can produce one half a barrel of oil substitute (21 gallons) per year. With 67 Million pigs contributing, that would be 33 Million barrels per year. –  About three days worth of US Oil imports. OK, it won’t wean us from oil. That would, however, keep us in asphalt for about 100 days. And it would eliminate a big problem for pig farmers, as well as put a few more dollars in their pockets.

And it could be a win-win for the country. We all love Bacon, hate pig poop, and need oil.

Here is the article that spawned this one.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/stories.nsf/story/8BD4ECDDEBD84EC686257706000C0410?OpenDocument

Here is a recent article from Water & Wastewater about the process.
http://www.waterandwastewater.com/www_services/news_center/publish/article_002060.shtml

Here is an article from National Geographic about the process.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0701_040702_pigoil.html

And, here is the original research report news item.

http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/news/stories/news3557.html

And finally, here is a place you can read the original research paper OnLine!

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/20627967/THERMOCHEMICAL-CONVERSION-OF-SWINE-MANURE-AN-ALTERNATIVE-PROCESS-FOR

Well, that'll be a "wrap" with bacon and ham.

Ten steps to a better energy future.

---

---

Last year this country used 4,110,259,000 Megawatt-hours of electricity.  23.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and  7,117.5 Million Barrels of oil. All of this went to supply our never ending thirst for energy. We are an energy happy society. Seventy percent of that electricity was generated by fossil fuels – Coal and Natural Gas. Seventy Eight percent of the Oil we used went to move us, and our stuff, around – transportation. In fact, over 85 percent of ALL our energy came from non-renewable, finite, fossil fuels. Only 7% came from renewable or replaceable sources. The rest came from nuclear generated electrical power.

It is simple common sense that we cannot go on like this, even without the average annual 3.4% growth in energy consumption. Fossil fuels were created millions of years ago, after mass extinctions of animals and plants. Over those years, sediment built up over the dead matter, which rotted, and then, under mounting pressure from the built up layers of sediment, became the Oil & Gas we use today. So far, in just the last 100 years we have consumed well over half of the known or suspected Oil on this planet. We have consumed well over 1/3 of the known Natural Gas and Coal.  Much of what is left of all of these resources has to be recovered by ever more complex, challenging, expensive, and time-consuming methods than were used previously. At this rate we will be completely out of obtainable fossil fuels well within the next 100 years. And, to get any more, the earth will have to go through a mass extinction of life, and still wait a million or so years for it to “cook”.

Of course, eventually, we hope science will find a way to generate unlimited amounts of power. Eventually, someone will develop warp drive, and the associated matter-antimatter power plant. Shortly after that, we will meet Vulcans for the first time. Yet, in the lore of science fiction, even that  happens well past when we run out of our current fossil fuels. So, until that day, we need to make the best of what we have, and find other ways to power our society. The clock is ticking. Time is running out.

To be sure, I like my technology. And technology takes energy. I am not one who advocates we should do without. I believe that with reasonable conservation, new sources of energy, and a firm, unwavering commitment to putting those sources in place, we can continue to enjoy today’s technology, and whatever tomorrow will bring. Along the way, we will be saving those finite fossil resources to be used in ways that cannot be replaced – such as that ’66 GTO for Sunday drives.

So, Presented here is my roadmap to energy wealth. With 10 points, this is the path I believe we have to set upon to feed our need for energy, allow us to enjoy our technology, show respect for our planet and it’s environment, and provide for our future needs. In the vernacular,  to have our cake, and eat it too.


1 - We need to encourage green building practices and conservation where appropriate and effective.

We are not going to stop driving our cars. We are not going to stop running our Air Conditioners, furnaces, microwaves and lawn & garden equipment. Where we CAN make a difference is in places like making our homes more passively efficient. Installing insulation, plugging air leaks, putting in weather stripping. Building green. We can take advantage, where appropriate and economically sound, of newer appliances and lighting methods. Government can require increasing, but readily achievable, efficiency standards for our gadgets, toys, and tools. We can try to turn our lights off when not in use, without running around in the dark.

2 - We need to start integrating Plug-In Hybrids and Electric vehicles into our transportation system.

Electricity is the most efficient, widely available, and most useable means we have to transport energy. It is also highly amenable to powering our vehicles. With the sole exception of batteries, electric vehicles are mature technology, easily manufactured, and work, drive, and perform virtually the same as current vehicles.

Electricity, from an engineering standpoint, is actually a simpler, more desirable and more flexible drive system than current internal combustion drivetrains. Except for those darn batteries. But, as a couple of manufacturers are already proving, the battery technology is already there to support a large part of our short trip, and commuting driving. The only difference to the owner is plugging it in at night – verses stopping at the gas station.

While we currently generate most of our electricity with fossil fuels, large electrical generating plants are far more efficient at using resources than a conventional internal combustion vehicle. While those plants produce pollutants and greenhouse gasses, it is much easier to control those at a relatively small amount of places, as opposed to a couple hundred million point sources. Electricity can be distributed with relatively little loss, and electric vehicles themselves are quite efficient at making use of the electricity. With all things considered, electric vehicles are still several times more efficient at using our fossil fuels than gasoline powered ones. Electric vehicles also remove the source of emissions away from crowded inner cities, contributing to a cleaner local environment in our cities.

But, more important, most alternative energy sources – wind, solar, hydro, wave & tidal, Biogas fuel cells, produce electricity as their end product. That makes them a natural for integrating into our larger electric grid. As all these distributed sources feed their, maybe small, portion of power to the grid, electric vehicles can use the amalgamated sum of their energy.  Eventually these alternative sources will start displacing our fossil power plants, moving us closer to the goal of total renewable energy, and less fossil fuels. Every time we convert energy to another form, we lose some of it, It is much more efficient to use the energy in the form it is created – electricity.

Of course, many people do not have one car for commuting, and another one for longer trips. Most vehicles have to support many uses, For that reason, Plug-In hybrids are a sound alternative.  With a plug-in, short trip driving is accomplished with electricity from our grid. When there is a need to drive further, old, reliable gasoline is still  there to provide the range. A win for practicality, energy, and the environment.

3 –  We need to encourage the conversion of fleet vehicles and long haul trucks to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG).

There are some places where electric vehicles or plug ins do not make sense right now, either for technical, or economic, reasons. Fleet vehicles – Busses, city trucks, taxi cabs, the list is long. These vehicles have to make many short stops, often with longer distances mixed in. These are conditions that will deplete a battery rapidly. However, these vehicles are normally fueled at centralized locations, where infrastructure can be put in place readily. These vehicles should be encouraged to use CNG – Compressed Natural Gas. Simularly, long haul and inter-city trucks make long trips, and need significant levels of power. This is also well outside the capacity of current battery technology. But, the fueling points for these are also contained to a relatively small number of places that could also easily support CNG refueling infrastructure. The technology for CNG fueled vehicles and trucks currently exists and is readily obtainable.

CNG is also a highly suitable bridge fuel for our other vehicles. Currently CNG is much cheaper than gasoline per Gallon Gasoline Equivalent (GGE), and it creates less pollution and greenhouse gasses than gasoline.  There are many CNG vehicles available already, and many more on the way. Fueling with CNG is also getting easier. There are currently as many CNG fueling stations in the US as there are E89 stations, and more are being put in every week. Unfortunately they are most concentrated in certain areas, but that will change as the market expands. You can also purchase a compressor station for your home, and use your own natural gas supply to refuel. There are currently some subsidies and tax credits in place for purchasing both the vehicle, and the fueling station. The conversion is a simple one for a manufacturer, and dual fuel vehicles are becoming common. CNG tanks do take up room in the vehicle, and their range is normally shorter than a comparable gasoline or diesel one. However, these are things that are easy to live with. Finally, a plug-in hybrid using CNG for it’s internal combustion engine would be the best of both worlds.

We must keep in mind though,  CNG is only a bridge to eventual electric when the battery technology is there or replaced by something else. Our current natural gas supply is getting smaller, and new supplies are more expensive to recover. This, along with increased demand, will certainly drive prices much higher. And, remember, it is still a finite, fossil fuel.

4 - We need to strengthen, expand, and upgrade our electric distribution infrastructure.

Of course, to power all these new electric vehicles, and in order to power our existing homes, buildings and industry, we need to get the electricity from all these generation sources to the end user. We also need to be able to combine the outputs of the many smaller distributed generators. That is the job of our electric grid.

Currently our nation's electric grid is frail, outdated, and in many places, overburdened. It also does not have the control capacity currently to accept large amounts of power from wind farms or other power producers, nor can it presently take advantage of a large amount of distributed generation. We need to expand, enlarge, and update the grid. Larger, more efficient conductors, better, more flexible switch and distribution yards, and many more ways to allow power to be fed into the grid from many more, smaller, sources of electricity. Supply and demand of the electric grid has to be managed in real time. The grid cannot store electricity – yet – we must make exactly as much electricity as we use, no more, no less. So, achieving the goal of distributed generation requires better and more flexible control systems.

This is the purpose behind Smart Grid. Putting in place more flexible and robust control mechanisms to allow this management. At the user end, Smart Metering will allow, not only better monitoring, but the ability to control individual distributed generation at our homes and offices (such as Solar PV), and allow for the accounting and  measuring of the energy produced or consumed. Smart metering will enable the economic benefits of distributed generation.

5 - We need to find ways to incentify large scale wind power projects, and make it easier for them to supply power to our national grid.

Wind power scales up nicely. Large wind turbines are very efficient, and can be sited where many of the objections to them - noise and aesthetics are two - are not as relevant. However they are an expensive initial investment, they require much maintenance, and the electric infrastructure has to be in place to deliver the power they produce. There are also many ecological concerns - bird strikes, and even concerns by Air Traffic Control with radar interference. While wind has the potential to be a formidable source of our electrical needs, we need to aggressively identify and resolve the issues facing it's adoption. This is a place where government, in the arenas of regulation, rights, licensing, and subsidies or tax abatements, can have a significant positive impact.


6 - We need to encourage and promote residential solar Photovoltaic power, and distributed generation.

Solar Photvoltaics, unlike wind, scale DOWN very well. A large solar installation is very expensive, uses a lot of land, and is complex. A small installation however, which can supply a significant percentage of a homes electrical needs is simple, reliable, and becoming much more cost effective every day. This kind of distributed generation removes much of the burden from our electrical grid, brings our homes closer to energy self-sufficiency, and is the ultimate in environmentally friendly. Again, government, via subsidies to homeowners, and regulatory oversight, can do much to get this technology in place.


7 - We need to rebuild our Railroads, and encourage more use.

Railroads are the second most energy efficient way we have to move goods - after Ships. They are four times more efficient than trucks for moving large amounts of material long distances. Although I truly do lament the effect it would have on our trucking industry, we need to move more of our long distance shipping to this old, stable, and efficient method.

8 –  Biogas

While Biogas is not sufficient in quantity to power our vehicles, it is already proven as an effective source for small, distributed, electrical generation. It also can serve well in third world countries for cooking, refrigeration, and some space heating. In combination with Large Scale Wind, and small-scale Solar PV, biogas from landfills or agricultural and livestock waste, can make a significant contribution to our overall supply of electricity.

9 – Small-scale electric generation – distributed generation.

From small hydro, to tidal currents, there are many ways to generate electricity from natural phenomena. By promoting, and encouraging these small-scale systems, and not trying to make them the be all – end all of power, they can also make a significant contribution to our overall electricity supply. We need to encourage small scale innovation, and make it easier and economically possible for small companies, with a good idea, to put their creations in place, and connect them to our infrastructure. With appropriate modernization, our electric grid is an enormous resource. It has the potential of allowing the interconnection of a multitude of small scale power producers, all contributing their share to the national need for energy. Not only will this reduce our need for fossil fuel generation, but it can be the incubator for the creation, and proliferation of profitable and innovative small business. Combining residential and small commercial solar photo-voltaics, with the outputs of thousands of producers like “Bob’s tidal power”, we can switch this country from centralized fossil fuels to decentralized, reliable, and environmentally sound distributed power sources.



10 – Industry and manufacturing.

While there is much basic research into alternative energy going on in this country, the sad fact is much of the applied research, design, and especially manufacturing of alternative power systems is happening in other parts of the world. We need to find ways to bring both the technology, and the industry back home. This is again a place where local, state and federal government can rightfully encourage progress. By encouraging technology transfer from basic research to private industry. By providing financial backing to those industries to support and develop innovation. By economic and political incentives to re-purpose idled production assets, factories, and facilities into the production of the physical hardware we need to accomplish our energy goals. By making it easier and less expensive for companies to acquire and retain skilled workers, engineers and managers. By a vigorous, directed, and unrelenting push to rehabilitate our basic educational systems. By a purposeful, and high profile campaign to enhance science, technology, engineering and math education and interest in our schools. By encouraging Americans to once again embrace science and technology.



Finally, incorporating all ten of these steps, I would propose a project, and an investment, by this country and it’s citizens. A project on the scale of, and in the spirit of, Apollo and the moon landing in the sixties. We need to set forth an agenda, a time-line, and a goal. We need not have all the answers, we need not specify how we will accomplish it, but only what it is we will accomplish. We need to make it not only a national priority, but a national agenda, and a national passion. We have spent many billions propping up our financial systems. Whether that was necessary is not the subject of this dialog. However, moving forward, we need to dedicate the same level of resources, financially, politically, and spiritually, to achieving not only energy independence, but responsible, renewable, abundant energy. We CAN do it. We have the technology - now. We have the need – now. We only need the intestinal fortitude from our politicians, our government, our leaders, our industry, and our citizens, to make the commitment, and follow through.

So, there it is. My Ten steps to a better, cleaner, more vibrant and sustainable energy future. I am available for consulting work if the fee is right. Drop me a line!

No, really, I want your thoughts. Please comment!

Obama invests $8 billion in hi-speed rail

---

---

Recently the Obama Administration announced an “investment” of 8 billion dollars in Hi-Speed passenger rail.

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-giving-8-billion-to-high-speed-rail-2010-1?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+greensheet+%28Green+Sheet%29

A few months before, Warren Buffett announced his investment of 26 billion bucks in Class 1 Intermodal Freight Rail. (Burlington).

http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2009-11-04-buffett-interview_N.htm

I wonder which one will be the best investment? Both? Neither?

To be clear I am a railroad advocate. I believe this country should do more to enhance the viability of freight rail as opposed to long haul over-the-road trucking. Various studies I have seen show that, from an energy standpoint, rail uses about 1/4 as much fuel per ton as over the road trucks. (Mr. Buffett appears to agree).

As well, historically, the infrastructure (rails & bridges) of railroads has been paid for by private companies. In contrast, the cost of the infrastructure for trucking (roads, bridges), while partially offset by taxes on the trucks, is none the less borne by government and public funds.

But, as I said, that is Class 1 Freight rail. I do not believe that High Speed Passenger rail has any immediate future in this country beyond the few places where it is already. And, even many of those routes have to be heavily subsidized to exist. We are a car-borne society. Americans do not, as a general rule, want to take the train. Certainly not city to city. They like to take their cars with them. If they are traveling farther than a reasonable car journey, we have one of the largest and most efficient (that term is relative) air travel systems on the planet. And, once you get to the distant airport, there is a familiar car waiting for you.

But, back to the freight train...

There is certainly much more to the economics of freight than fuel and infrastructure. Logistics, especially for railroads, is a very large concern, and they can have significant effects on costs. I am far from knowledgeable about the logistics infrastructure, nor am I qualified to discuss it. My primary concern, agenda, or perspective, is the best use of our fossil fuels.


While it is old (1996), very long and boring, here is an extensive study on the costs of various shipping methods by the Transportation Research Board – did I mention boring? This reports focuses on the cost to society (IE Infrastructure) of various methods of shipping. However some very useful comparisons can be found about the entire cost associated with the shipping methods. Again, although the study is old, the comparisons, and conclusions,  are still very valid.

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr246.pdf

The ARTI Biogas generator

---

---

I stumbled upon this interesting bit of technology while researching something else. It captured both my interest and my imagination. This unit is designed for use in underdeveloped areas to provide methane gas primarily for cooking. It is intended to offset the LPG normally used. It requires some effort, and the output is not much, but it is adequate for it's purpose. This is cool!

The unit is the size of a medium refrigerator, and reportedly costs about $200 USD. After setting it up, you provide it with about 4.5 pounds (2kg) of food waste, and 2 gallons of water. This is enough to produce 500 liters of methane gas a day. 500 liters is about 17 cubic feet of gas. Looking at my gas bill (heat & hot water) this would run my house for about 20 minutes. But, it appears to be enough to supply the cooking needs of a family. 17 cubic feet is equal to about 1/7 gallon of gasoline, so it is not for powering your CNG car unless you make really short trips! These units are apparently geting popular in India. Lets hope they catch on elsewhere. Below is a link to the ARTI Website, as well as a link to a technical analysis of the unit, and a very good Youtube video about the unit.

http://www.arti-india.org/content/view/45/40/

Technical analysis:

http://www.eawag.ch/organisation/abteilungen/sandec/publikationen/publications_swm/downloads_swm/arti_biogas.pdf

Video about the unit

About this blog

---

---

 

Another energy blog. How mundane. Why should you be excited to find THIS ONE?

Energy is a large and fascinating subject. It is important to our way of life, our economy, and our future. I think we have a bright energy future ahead of us, but we need to start DOING things now to make it happen. I do not believe that just "wishing it so" is going to have any impact. In the immortal words of a Steve Martin skit "Forget it, that's not going to happen ".

There is a lot of misinformation, many myths, some sleight of hand, and plenty of political rhetoric surrounding energy. My most important task here will be to "open the curtains". Inform, educate, and maybe even entertain, as I present the facts, dispel those myths, and shed light on the rhetoric. I intend to apply logic, data, science and physics to these discussions.

To be sure, you will get the impression there is a lot of "negativity" on this blog. It is not intentional. I believe in alternative energy, and I enjoy the entire energy picture immensely. However there are myriad problems, roadblocks and snags along the way. Before we can address these issues, we have to understand what they are, what effect they have, and what the options are. I do not intend to pull punches, and I certainly do not intend to look at anything through rose colored glasses.

I will, however, continue to use way too many metaphors, quotes, and figures of speech. Yes, I am like that in real life also. It drives my wife crazy. I also write, talk, and illustrate, in groups of three. I do not know why, how, or for what reason, I just do…

So, First of all, the "nots".

• I am not going to just post a link to every little scrap of news about energy that is out there.
• I am not going to mindlessly accept, and dutifully write about, just any information I find.
• I am not going to follow the herd, toe the political line, or ride the "spin" train.

And, here is what I intend to accomplish.

• I will post, talk, dissect, and opine about, significant news in the world of energy.
• I intend to educate about energy, not simply throw things out there.
• I will apply my knowledge of science, physics and technology to dissecting and analyzing energy information where appropriate.
• I hope to consistantly add basic articles explaining energy and technology.
• I promise I will supply plenty of facts, figures, and quotable statistics.
• I will cite references and supply links to support what I say.
• I will not be hesitant to supply MY opinion, but I will strive to support it with facts.
• I will welcome comments, discussion, and dissension. That dialog is what's important!.

I will try to keep order to this blog. There is a Table of contents page. I will keep it updated the best I can, but it is a manually generated page. It is possible that the one or two LATEST entries in this blog have not made it to the Table Of Contents.

If you are looking for something specific, I will keep the postings categorized, hopefully well. But, I just KNOW that is going to get out of hand. Hopefully I will come up with a better way.

I have also added a Glossary Page to define terms, and a Reference page with some useful facts and figures. And, do not forget my store, where you can purchase Books & Videos about energy and science, as well as many other things.

I just started this blog the end of January 2010. I am still trying to fit it into my schedule. I already have much planned to write about. Some of it still involves significant research. I hope as time passes I will be able to afford more time for it. My goal is to have at least one or more interesting posts added a day. I am far from that yet, but... I will get there!

This blog is in addition to my MCC Workshop Electronics hobbyist site - A website I have also neglected as of late, but that I have hopes of pursuing once again when I have the resources. It IS a process :-). If you enjoy electronics and science, or if you are setting up a workshop, enjoy vintage equipment, or vintage (retro) computers, drop by there for a visit!

So, bookmark this blog, come back often, set up a feed, and/or follow me on twitter. (http://twitter.com/Altenergyblog ). I promise you are in for a fun, informative, and useful ride. And, please do not hesitate to add comments, discuss things, or disagree with what I say. I welcome debate, and I am happy to discuss things. This blog also has a Facebook group at: Understanding Energy - The Energy Blog You are of course welcome to join it!

Please read the "About the author" page to learn more about me and my interests and credentials.

You can also visit my personal hobby website at http://mccworkshop.com

TVA Announces Wind Energy Contracts.

---

---

The Tennessee Valley Authority announced on Jan 14 that it had signed contracts to purchase up to 815 megawatts of wind generation. Two of the contracts with Invenergy Wind affiliates are for a total of 350 megawatts from wind farm projects at the White Oak Energy Center in McLean County, Ill., and the Bishop Hill Energy Center in Henry County, Ill., both beginning in January 2012.

A third contract with CPV Renewable Energy Co. will provide up to 165 megawatts of wind energy from the Cimarron project in Gray County, Kan., beginning as early as January 2012.

Finally, A fourth contract, with Iberdrola Renewables Inc., will deliver up to 300 megawatts from the Streator Cayuga Ridge project in Illinois, starting in mid-2010.

You can read the entire press release here: http://www.tva.gov/news/releases/janmar10/contracts_wind.htm

---

A little more about the Tennessee Valley Authority.

The TVA was established in 1933 during Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. It was created by the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933. (http://www.tva.com/abouttva/pdf/TVA_Act.pdf ). It's mission, as described in the act is:

To improve the navigability and to provide for the flood control of the Tennessee River; to provide for reforestation and the proper use of marginal lands in the Tennessee Valley; to provide for the agricultural and industrial development of said valley; to provide for the national defense by the creation of a corporation for the operation of Government properties at and near Muscle Shoals in the State of Alabama, and for other purposes.

You can read more about their history here: http://www.tva.com/abouttva/history.htm

According to the TVA 2009 annual report, the TVA has 27,000 megawatts of baseload generation capacity, and 7,000 megawatts of peaking and backup capacity. Ignoring the peaking plants (all gas turbines), 51% percent of their capacity comes from coal (14,000 megawatts).

The rest (49%) already come from "non-carbon emitting sources". Nuclear accounts for 25% (7,000 megawatts), and hydroelectric for 22% (6,000 megawatts). 2% is from "other" and includes wind, solar, methane, etc.

You can read their 2009 Annual report at: http://investor.shareholder.com/tva/sec.cfm
(Select "10-K annual report Nov 25,2009" The above info is on pages 12-14, but the entire report is good reading, and a good look inside a major power producer.)

While on the subject of the TVA, there is a mis-conception is that TVA is "subsidized". Indeed, many people, when they hear "government company" make the assumption "MY TAX DOLLARS!". But, like the Post Office and others, that is not always true. The TVA act requires that their rates cover all costs of operations. They sell debt securities to finance projects. Note also, they are a wholesaler, who sells power to distributors, who then sell it to customers.

Nowhere in their annual report cited above, are there any government subsidies. The below is from that report:

" Initially, all TVA operations were funded by federal appropriations. Direct appropriations for the TVA power program ended in 1959, and appropriations for TVA’s stewardship, economic development, and multipurpose activities ended in 1999. Since 1999, TVA has funded all of its operations almost entirely from the sale of electricity and power system financings. TVA’s power system financings consist primarily of the sale of debt securities. TVA is owned by the United States and is not authorized to issue equity securities."

They are exempt from Federal Taxation. They do have to pay "tax equivalents" to county and state.