B.A.N.A.N.A.
One of my favorite acronyms, BANANA replaces the old stand-by NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard). BANANA stands for Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything. Anne Applebaum mentions it in a column in the Washington Post about opposition to wind farms. I posted a long piece about wind power when I was just starting to blog. I wrote that after I got into a long comment discussion about the subject at Jane Galt's blog. It was an interesting experience. It got a bit spirited at times.
Better yet, let's put it this way, it didn't go over well with the true believers. I got arguments from people to the effect of "well, if you'd just be so negative, you could find a way to solve those problems. Since solving the problems would require repealing the laws of physics which I know is beyond my many talents, I gave up trying to tell them. One guy suggested (I kid you not) using kites - he was not joking.
Anyway, here's my wind power primer. While Applebaum's column concentrates on opposition to siting of the farms, mine is a bit more technical. But a pretty easy read.
By Bradley J. Fikes, Wednesday, 19 April , 2006 @ 8:04 pm
Gaius,
What do you think of solar power from Stirling engines, such as in this project?
http://public.sempra.com/newsreleases/viewPR.cfm?PR_ID=1941&Co_Short_Nm=SE
SAN DIEGO, Dec. 20, 2005 – San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (SDG&E) today announced that the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has approved its contracts to purchase 300 megawatts (MW) of solar power, with the potential to grow to 900 MW within 10 years. The project will be one of the largest solar facilities in the world when fully constructed.
“The CPUC’s approval of our contracts is a win-win situation for our customers and the communities we serve,†said Terry Farrelly, vice president of electric and gas procurement at SDG&E. “The project will provide clean, renewable solar energy and move us closer to achieving our goal to supply 20 percent of our customers’ needs from renewable resources by 2010.â€
SDG&E will purchase the solar energy from Arizona-based Stirling Energy Systems. SDG&E and Stirling have agreed to a 20-year contract to first purchase 300 MW from Stirling’s SES Solar 2 facility, home to a series of Stirling solar dishes to be developed on approximately three square miles in Imperial Valley, Calif. SDG&E has options on two future phases that could add an additional 600 MW of renewable energy and capacity to SDG&E’s resource mix. Solar energy is generally abundant during the hottest parts of the day, making it available to meet peak demand from customers.
The Stirling solar dishes use a mirrored array to focus the sun’s rays on a modern Stirling engine. Stirling engines, originally developed in 1816, have four sealed cylinders containing hydrogen or helium. When a cylinder is heated by the sun, the gas expands and pushes a piston; when it cools, the piston retreats. The mechanical action turns a generator and produces electricity. Because the cylinders are sealed, Stirling engines do not produce emissions.
By Gauis Arbo, Wednesday, 19 April , 2006 @ 9:01 pm
A nice, incremental thing. It will produce fairly reliable power given it’s location, but only during the day and (obviously) only when the sun is not hidden.
So, as an add on, not bad.
But as a solution? No. How many MW’s from how much area? Density becomes a problem. We will run out of desert area eventually. And how much other damage are these things doing? The fact that it is daylight only power really only helps with daylight load (which is good, since that is a prime consumption time). There’s still a lot of night to power, too.
Stephen Den Beste did a really good post (actually more than one) on why incremental gains will not help in the long run. You need a breakthrough technology and none of the “green” alternatives are breakthrough. (Sadly, I cannot find those posts he did - they were great.)
By Bradley J. Fikes, Wednesday, 19 April , 2006 @ 10:46 pm
Gaius,
Thanks! Fodder for a future technology column. Of course, there’s nuclear power, which some are giving a new look at. That would be more than an incremental power source. Right?
I remember Den Beste’s post that you mentioned. I looked at his site a fair amount when he was still active there. He actually does the math and quantifies things.
OT, I have just been re-reading some of the flame wars at various Web sites. Scary. One of the things I am going to try to do is encourage a civil tone when I get comments going. And that means I will have to be civil myself, unlike how I have been on some threads
Reading the nasty tone among what one supposes are adults is proving to be quite educational.
By Gauis Arbo, Wednesday, 19 April , 2006 @ 10:55 pm
Feel free to fact check me with other power engineers. I had that post vetted by another engineer before I posted it. Word of caution - make sure it is a power engineer. Not because I am trying to hide anything, but because it is actually a very narrow field, believe it or not. Almost nobody teaches it anymore these days.
I try very hard to stay civil - with the occasional failure, frankly.
You might want to read the post I did on demonization. There’s a link there to a site that did an astonishing amount of research on propaganda and rhetoric techniques. Kind of a road map for what to expect. And you should expect it.