Why not a? geothermal electric grid tie generator?
hi i got a thought for a geothermal device that would generate electric power and grid tie (feed the energy grid) the juice back into the grid.
is anyone outthere interested in developing a device like that?
if you reckon about solar wind those alternative fuels are weather dependent, but a geothermal device has always the same avarage output and is over 24 hours more productive than either wind or solar.

But not a powerplant size geothermal unit a residential unit you can place in your backyard like an air conditioner with either

pipes buried 6 feet below forming a grid covering your hole backyard.

or

pipes sunk into a lake

similar to this

If there is enough heat in your backyard to turn water into steam go for it. The concept is used in Iceland. If you don’t have that much heat in your backyard you could cover the whole neighborhood in pipes and it won’t be enough to produce power.

Location to residential areas: They could be built on the same location to replace conventional coal and oil power plants. Nuclear plants don’t not pollute the local air.
Terrorist attack: Unlikely- they were designed during the cold war to withstand nuclear missile attacks.
Nuclear waste disposal: U.S. has plenty of unpopulated areas for this. Not the greatest solution, but better than having Florida underwater in a few hundred years due to global warming.
Electromagnetic radiation: no more that current elctric power plants.

Solar and wind energy are not feasable since neither would provide suffieceint power to heat your home and drive your car. With Nulcear both would go electric.

Let me preface this with I LIKE green generation and promote it.

But, I power up 20% of Virginia from nuclear powered generation. We operate as base load plants. That means we are always at 100% power. Why? Because even with the cost of all the regulatory required oversight, training and licensing, engineering and security measures; we are simply the Lowest cost producer of electricity in the industry. Yes, this includes the cost of storage for our waste fuel. One day the Federal government will make excellent on the promise of a final storage place and our cost per Mega Watt Hour will go down even further.
(P.S. there is no such thing as super heated water…its steam and we don’t release it, some places may evaporate a lot of water in cooling towers but it comes right back when it rains)

Recap:
Nuclear plants cost less to operate than fossil plants.
Nuclear plants cost less to build (per unit of electricity generated) than renewable sources of the same capacity such as solar or wind.
Nuclear plants can produce much larger amounts of generation in the same environmental area as a wind farm/solar plant.
Nuclear plants have higher capacity factors (more likely to be making electricity) than most other plants.
Nuclear plants do not affect the environment around them such as some hydro power networks.
Waste nuclear fuel storage has a smaller footprint than your trash, is less hazardous than your medical waste, and once in its final resting place can never be more perilous than a huge hunk of hot steel.

I recently received quotes for about $6500 for a 1 kilowatt system. (fully installed) This would also save me in the order of $280 /year in reduced power bills.

There needs to be another meter added so the energy company can prove the renewable energy source. You can really be paid if you generate more than you use. Most homes would need a 2-3 KW system to provide surplus power.

I agree that there is profiteering going on. I can buy 1 KW of solar panels, new for less than $8000 and an inverter for less than $2000. I’m also a qualified electrician with plenty of experience with solar panels. I can’t get the rebate since I am not a licenced "solar installer."

I can also tell you that the installed price in April was $7500 (before the rebate double to $8000)

If the government were to relax the rules of compliance and simply allow meters to spin backwards, the cost of installation would drop dramatically. Probably enable an off the shelf package to be developed that could be installed in a few minutes by even a restricted electrical licence holder.

The larger companies would not be in complete control then, would they ?

Anyway if your interested here is a link to the current programme. There is a link to installers on this site also.

http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/renewable/pv/index.html

I’m hanging out to see if I can get a better deal, after November. Both sides seem suddenly interested in the environment recently, wonder why.

(Queensland by the way)

I recently received quotes for about $6500 for a 1 kilowatt system. (fully installed) This would also save me in the order of $280 /year in reduced power bills.

There needs to be another meter added so the energy company can prove the renewable energy source. You can really be paid if you generate more than you use. Most homes would need a 2-3 KW system to provide surplus power.

I agree that there is profiteering going on. I can buy 1 KW of solar panels, new for less than $8000 and an inverter for less than $2000. I’m also a qualified electrician with plenty of experience with solar panels. I can’t get the rebate since I am not a licenced "solar installer."

I can also tell you that the installed price in April was $7500 (before the rebate double to $8000)

If the government were to relax the rules of compliance and simply allow meters to spin backwards, the cost of installation would drop dramatically. Probably enable an off the shelf package to be developed that could be installed in a few minutes by even a restricted electrical licence holder.

The larger companies would not be in complete control then, would they ?

Anyway if your interested here is a link to the current programme. There is a link to installers on this site also.

http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/renewable/pv/index.html

I’m hanging out to see if I can get a better deal, after November. Both sides seem suddenly interested in the environment recently, wonder why.

(Queensland by the way)

For a heat pump, you could consider the type of system usually installed for ground source. Some of these depend on water from the ground, pumped through a heat exchanger. In your case, you could use the pool water., circulating it past the heat exchanger, and back to the pool. You could arrange it so the "waste" cold is sent outdoors when you don’t want to cool the house, and to the house on hot days. If there are winter periods when you do not want to heat the pool,, you could have the heat pump draw heat from the pool, for heating the house.

Of course you could use a resistance heater for the pool, but it would be two or three times less efficient. You can buy pretty huge inline spa heaters. They are on the Internet.

Also some companies will try to get you financing through a bank but this is not a common practice in Canada yet.

Solar Electric (Photovolataics) has come down in price to the point where it can pay for itself in just 10 years(or less) in desert areas like Southern California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico & large parts of Texas where summer cooling bills are outrageous. Why not require it on all new construction?

With long term(10+ yr) Sallie Mae loans Solar Electric can really pay for itself from the start when you factor in Federal Tax Credits and State(like California) or Utility Company(like Nevada) incentives. Why not require it & give property owners Govt secured, long term low interest loans to pay for it?

There are a few reasons why this has not been mandated. First, as the previous answerer said, solar power is not feasible everywhere. It works well in southern California, because it is very sunny and energy needs are moderate due to very mild temperatures. It would probably not work in Seattle, Washington, where it rains very frequently and is cloudy much of the time. It might also be a poor choice in North Dakota, where scorching summer heat and crippling winter blizzards place a huge strain on the energy grid.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, this is America. Technology and industry are theoretically independent of the government. It’s right that the government sponsors research and subsidizes corporations, but individuals ultimately have the freedom to choose what they want to invent and what inventions they want to use. Each person who builds a house has the right to choose how to build it, and each person who buys a house has the right to choose what kind of home they want to live in. A builder who wants to appeal to environmentally concscious homeowners will build a home that takes advantage of alternative energy sources. If solar power technology becomes more and more sophisticated, more efficient, and less expensive, everyone will want it in their own home, and it won’t have to be mandated. If it isn’t appealing enough for people to choose it on their own, the government shouldn’t force them to do it.

Are panels worth it in your area? The only way to know for sure is to find a local installer in your phone book, and then question for local references. If you can’t find a local installer, that’s a clue, and if they can’t give you any references that are nearby, that’s another clue.

The panels don’t really store energy, the energy is sold back to the power company when what you produce is more than you consume, driving the meter backwards. Again, this is not a huge moneymaker, and in fact, it may be impossible to make a profit, depending on your local laws.