NoVa, Transmission Lines and Distributed Generation

Interesting dilemma: Dominion predicts that Northern Virginia faces the risk of blackouts by 2011 unless a 240-mile high-voltage transmission line is built from Pennsylvania to a power sub-station in Loudoun County. Predictably, the Piedmont Environmental Council and other citizen groups are up in arms — nobody likes transmission lines cutting through their farms and villages. (Read about the latest wrinkle in this long-running saga in this report by the Winchester Star and this by the Washington Post.)

I live near a transmission line and I can tell you, it is U-G-L-Y, though I don’t have much grounds for complaint — I moved into my house knowing that it was there.

Next to the Dulles South controversy, which seems to be resolved now, the transmission line is the hottest controversy in the northern Virginia piedmont. I don’t sense that residents of Fairfax County and other urbanized counties in the region have reached the same fever pitch of agitation as the citizens of Loudoun who will be most immediately affected. The suburban citizenry will live in sublime disregard of the inevitable until the inevitable hits them in the form of brownouts and blackouts. Then all hell will break loose.

If the debate is cast in an either/or format, the Piedmont Environmental Council and its constituents will lose. Virginia’s political system will favor the interests of the nearly two million residents of Virginia’s Washington suburbs who are threatened with electricity blackouts over the interests of a few tens of thousands of rural residents who are threatened with a loss of pristine vistas.

But the debate does not have to be either/or. There are alternatives. As I touched upon in a previous post, “Fixing the Power Grid: Distributed Generation,” and will explore in detail in an upcoming column, the problem is the current electric industry paradigm centered on huge power plants, typically located in remote areas, that connect to population centers with high-voltage power lines. As long as we stick with that model, monster power lines are an unavoidable necessity, and the rights of landowners along their routes will be sacrificed for the “common good.”

The alternative is moving to a system of smaller-scale power sources embedded in close proximity to the consumers of the electricity. Photovoltaic electricity is on the cusp of being economically competitive. According to Saifur Rahman, a Virginia Tech expert in distributed generation, it would cost only $10,000 to install an array of photovoltaic cells on a roof-top, with batteries for storage, capable of generating enough power for a family of three. Such a system could sell electric power into the grid on bright sunny days and draw from the grid during other times. If the installation cost were rolled into a mortgage, it could be paid off over years with the savings from electric bills. The main constraint right now, Rahman says, is not the efficiency of the solar arrays but the difficulty finding contractors qualified to install them.

If the financial savings aren’t enough to induce you to install solar units, consider this: Having your own energy source protects you against local power outages from snow storms, ice storms, hurricanes and other natural disasters. (Hurricane Isabel knocked me off the grid for 10 days.)

Another commercially competitive technology is cogeneration — smaller power plants that generate electricity and convert waste heat to steam, which can be used for heating/air conditioning. Cogeneration would be most applicable to apartment buildings, office clusters and other densely populated areas.

More decentralized and small-scale energy sources would present technical challenges for a distribution system designed for giant power plants. Kinks would have to be worked out. But such a system would be more stable and less vulnerable to system-wide blackouts like the one that afflicted 50 million people a couple of years ago. Oh, and for what it’s worth, Dominion wouldn’t have to run transmission lines through so many peoples’ farms and back yards.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

32 responses to “NoVa, Transmission Lines and Distributed Generation”

  1. Good post.

    Time to get off antiquated grid.

    Also, Dominion is now using FOREIGN coal to pollute us, while in Spain, thermal solar is now a REQUIREMENT for all renovated and new properties.

    Meanwhile, all we hear about in terms of Virginia alternative energy are futuristic hydrogen cars. Its shameful.

  2. By the way, for places where they the grid needs to be maintained and moved underground-

    http://www.gd-ais.com/capabilities/offerings/marketing/WORM.pdf

  3. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Of course.. if they put “smart” meters on homes… one’s that let folks know how much power they’re using… and helps them cut it back and/or defer use to non-peak hours…. we might not need to expand plants and distribution lines at the same pace….

    “Smart” meters are not pie-in-the-sky. They exist… and are in use.. in some places but they cost about $400 each and the power company has to go to a different way of operation…

    but … each one of these “smart” meters is a computer unto itself… it can communicate both ways and it could be a boon for the electric company… like knowing where power outages are … or being able to “look” at the power consumption on a demographic basis… i.e. “data mining”… they also could provide internet service…

    but methinks Dominion is a bit like VDOT…. they “know” how to turn their crank… and change is feared.

  4. E M Risse Avatar

    As we found in the 70s Modular Integrated Utility Systems can go a long way to reduce power demand and eliminate the loss from transmission.

    They require real mixes of land uses. See prior post.

    Also see our column on Soft Consumption Paths, 7 August 2006 at db4.dev.baconsrebellion.com.

    Big power grids are another infrastructure mistake.

    EMR

  5. I recently did some work for a company that uses solar panels to power their equipment in remote locations.

    Basically, the solar panels keep a battery charged which runs the equipment and a modem.

    When the company wants to download the data on the equiment they dial up the modem via a wireless network and get the info they need.

    Anyway, you could purchase a small solar panel, voltage meter, and a battery for less than $200 and power things in your home like a water heater or Air conditioner…..when the guy I was working with told me that I SERIOUSLY thought about taking advantage of it to power my water heater.

    Technology is available to become less dependent on the old grid system…..people are just lazy and unaware of it.

    When/if I get it up and running I will submit a pic…..and hopefully start a business installing them for others!!

  6. My information says it is more like $60,000 to install such an array, and it would not meet all your needs, only about 2/3.

    You would have to maintain it, and clean it, and the panels would have to be replaced every six years.

    If you don’t have a south facing roof, you would have to build some kind of structure to put it on. In any case, you probably really do NOT want it on your roof. You would hate to develope a roof leak and have to remove all that equipment to fix the leak. Roof is a really bad idea.

    But, there are now very efficient small cogeneration systems. These use a small natural gas engine to generate power when needed, and they use the waste engine heat for hot water and space heating or cooling.

    Compared to solar panels, this is a much better deal, because much of what is in the system you are going to buy anyway, all you are adding is the engine and generator and the control system.

    But, you are still running an engine and burning fuel. Now you have moved the geneating capacity and the pollution from far outside the city to close-in.

    Then you run smack up against the Air pollution regs.

    Solar panels are valuable for providing power in remote locations because you offset the cost of running wire. Many farms use them to charge electric fences and to power watering stations.

    But if you think you are going to heat your hot water with a $200 solar panel, you had better plan on taking a lot of tepid showers.

    You could do a lot better with a solar pond. These work by creating a pool of water that is supersaturated with salt. (Suitably insulated from the ground water.) Then you float a thin film of fresh water on top.

    The fresh water won’t mix with the salt water because of the density gradient, but it prevents convection from cooling the salt water below.

    In a couple of days the salt water will be boiling hot.

    Good luck trying to get a building permit.

  7. Thermal solar makes sense, especially in a place like Spain. Photovoltaic solar makes sense in special applications.

  8. Anonymous Avatar

    Whatever happened to fuel cells and their promise? I remember reading articles about houses in the Swiss Alps with fuel cells the size of freezers running their remote homes. Yet that potential seems to have gone totally away.

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    A house recently built in Spotsylvania:

    …”The Bennetts’ home may be the first in Virginia to use Building Integrated Photovoltaic Sunslates made by Atlantis Energy Systems Inc., based in Sacramento, Calif.

    The Sunslates actually look more like roof shingles than the customary raised panels people associate with solar-energy collectors and consider an aesthetic drawback.

    The slates together produce 3,000 watts of DC power, which is converted to AC for household use by a system installed by Rappahannock Electric Cooperative.

    The system allows excess power to be routed to REC, which pays the Bennetts for it at retail rates. The system includes dual meters, one to track the amount of REC power the household uses, and the other to track the returned surplus.

    The system is already hooked up, but since the Bennetts won’t be moving in until later in the fall, they’ll be depositing much of the power generated by the Sunslates into their electricity bank account with REC for a while.

    Additional equipment is available that would store some of that surplus power in batteries for use in the event of a power outage.

    Energy Star status requires that heating and cooling costs be at least 50 percent below average. Bennett said this system will bring that figure to 65 percent or even 70 percent.

    The Bennetts also had a Cocoon Insulation System installed, which uses shredded and tightly packed recycled newspaper. It not only conserves energy but reduces sound infiltration, as well. Because the density of the Cocoon provides an R-rating equal to a much thicker layer of fiberglass, 2-by-4 framing can be used rather than 2-by-6, saving on lumber costs from the outset. The insulation is fire and mold resistant, as well.

    http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=25&sid=923279

    Ahhh.. but I know your next question… “yeah.. but I bet it costs a bunch and won’t pay for itself”

    At which point – I would tell you that despite folks protestations to the contrary about being “all for the environment”, it is, in fact – about money.

    Right now – We CAN reduce the need for power lines, new power plants – both coal-powered and nuke AND we can stop putting mercury in our waterways…

    …if we really want to…

    Homeowner Bennett, by the way, is a Green Energy Consultant – he knows the practical applications…and is employing them on his new home…

    “Bennett estimates that the energy-saving features will add $40,000 to the cost of the house….anticipated electricity savings of nearly $12,000, tax credits totaling $4,000, plus a county waiver on the property taxes based on property taxes on the solar roof, and building green actually becomes profitable.”

    Now … let me add that you could buy a PHEV – (Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle) – a hybrid that you could plug-in and you could free yourself from quite a bit of oil/gasoline… again for a price.

    The point is… our economic benchmark – is based on the cheapest fuels with the most pollution. In effect, our energy costs are lower because we CHOOSE to pollute when there ARE alternatives.

    So – the only way that Solar and Wind can “beat” coal and nukes .. is when they are cheaper even though they don’t pollute to start with.

    Food for thought – for many of us – that think in terms of fancier homes/newer cars … when that same money could be put into energy efficiency – and contribute longer term to not having to take private land for more electric lines.

  10. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Hydrogen fuel is a cynical joke being perpetrated on an uneducated populace.

    Hydrogen does not exist in native form. It has to be “refined” if you will just like oil does.

    So – you have to expend energy to “extract” hydrogen from water… and guess where that energy comes from?

    Well.. right now.. from Natural Gas… and quite a bit of greenhouse gases produced from that process.

    Folks have suggested that we use “clean” nukes to produce “clean” hydrogen

    but if we did that .. why not use “clean” (not!) nukes to directly power plug-in hybrid cars?

    The problem with our energy policy is that we are:

    1. – cheap – we want cheap power even if it pollutes
    2. – uneducated and unwilling to make a commitment to change
    3. – apparently prefer going to Citgo and/or your favorite Sheik-run gasoline stations to enrich those overseas who would be just fine if the US went belly up.

  11. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I erred in my last post on the subject of the use of natural gas to produce hydrogen.

    Hydrogen is DERIVED from Natural Gas – right now. The other method is to extract it from water – a much more energy intensive process to date. In the process of deriving hydrogen from Natural Gas – green house gases are generated.

  12. Ray –

    It doesn’t cost $60,000 to do what I am trying to accomplish. My idea is not convert my entire house to run on solar energy – only specific parts.

    All of the other options you mention are probably better….on paper….but they are not practical….a lake? Give me a break.

    Again, technology is available to become less dependent on the old grid system, people are just lazy and unaware of it.

  13. Jim Bacon Avatar

    I must admit, I found Rahman’s numbers hard to believe. If people could generate a 15 to 20 percent return on investment by installing solar-generating power, feel good about being green and improving their energy reliability at the same time, we’d be seeing a lot more of it.

    The larger point, as amplified by several of the comments in this thread, is that solar energy, while not competitive perhaps with Dominion or AEP, is becoming increasingly affordable and accessible to those who would like to invest in it. Frankly, I would be quite happy with a 10 percent return on investment, especially if I could finance it through a tax-deductible second mortgage.

  14. I don’t doubt that any of what you say is incorrect.

    But. If you are not converting the house entirely, or you are selling back to the power company as a way of storing the energy you generate, then you still need to be on the “antiquated” grid. If you are “only” spending $20 k and only getting a partial benefit, it doesn’t change your payback equation.

    Ore-Ida uses a solar pond to raise enough heat to french fry their frozen potatoes. Solar ponds are cheap and effective. Sized for a home it wouldn’t be much bigger than a six person hot tub. Such a system could easily provide hot water or a hot water boost, thereby lowering energy costs.

    “In effect, our energy costs are lower because we CHOOSE to pollute when there ARE alternatives.” That’s right. But the alternatives ARE still more expensive. The question is whether the savings in pollution is actually worth the cost. Your attitude seems to be that ANY cost is worthwile in order to justify ANY reduction in pollution. That’s the kind of thinking that makes me, as an environmental chemist and energy economist, turn against the environmental movement. I think we will do better if we go after the stuff that is practical and economical now.

    No, the only way renewable energy sources can “beat” other sources is NOT when they are cheaper, but the additional costs do need to be offset by real additional savings

    Most people are not in the position to build a new home from scratch to incorporate these features. Even if we were, it would mean disposing of all the old inefficient homes, and what is the environmental cost of that? Then, if you are talking multi-unit homes, you will need a lot more roof space or something. Retrofitting existing homes is another ball of wax entirely.

    Finally, there is the mater of availability of capital. If you don’t have, or cannot raise the up-front cash, then having “options” ar not worth much. If you do have the cash, then you are free to invest it any way you like. As much as it is distateful, it might be that the best way to reduce your energy costs is to buy stock in Exxon so you can share in the profits, and use that money to buy your fuel.

    You have to spend money to extract energy from renewable sources, too, and you have to invest it in physical hardware that is expensive and needs engineering and maintenance. The hardware has environmental costs of its own.

    I have lived entirely under solar and wind power, when I lived on my boat. It can be done but it is not easy, cheap, or convenient. My home uses a Geothermal heat pump. It works very well, but it was an additional expense, and it requires special engineering and maintenance.

    I’m all in favor of alternative systems, and I’m an early adopter myself. I just don’t thinke we do ourselves any favors by not looking at these things with a cold, hard, calculating eyball.

    Yes, you can make a solar system pay, eventually. You have to be willing and able to raise the cash, wait a long time, and accept a low return on investment in the meantime. The question is what other alternatives can make a larger reduction with less grief, and sooner. 50 HP cars anyone?

  15. I drive a Hybrid Prius. I have heard it argued that the extra cost involved is not justified by the gas savings, but I find it is not true in my case.

    I have heard it argued that if you just take out the heavy electric motor and battery, the car would get BETTER mileage. I have no doubt that is true, plus you would eliminate the environmental cost of producing that hardware.

    But, you would have another underpowered econobox that would not sell. What is the better environmental choice? I dunno, all I can say is I like the car, it has plenty of power and space, and it is quiet.

    Bacon has complained that he doesn’t think his hybrid SUV gets sufficient extra mileage to cover the cost. If you want mileage, don’t buy an SUV. But, his SUV will carry more stuff for less money than another similar SUV. Part of the stuff you carry is all the extra armour to protect you and your family from all the other urban assault vehicles.

    So the question is whether the value of carrying all that extra stuff for less money is worth the difference in inital cost.

    I dunno, I guess it depends on how much you value your family, compared to how much you value the environment. Certainly, I’m not willing to make that call.

    I’m with Bacon. If I could get even a five percent return against a tax deductible mortgage, then I’d change my tune. Five percent is pretty good for tax free money.

    Maybe the house makes sense. Id want to see the estimate for a conventional 2500 sq ft home with 2×6 framing and extra insulation against the cost of all this specially engineered stuff, plus the consultant.

    Then you would still have to get out your crystal ball and figure out what future energy costs would be. On my Hybrid, I got lucky: I bought it before they were popular and befor fuel prices spiked.

  16. Polycrystalline photovoltaic panels (the most common type of solar panel) DO NOT need to be replaced in 6 years – as someone said. Mine are within 10% of original spec wattage after nearly 40 years of service. I’ve never seen one that was “worn out”.

  17. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “attitude seems to be that ANY cost is worthwile in order to justify ANY reduction in pollution.”

    not true. we’re talking not “any” but “how much”

    What is a number that is “reasonable”.

    GoldH2O said “some” to reduce. Thats certainly not ANY cost.

    If we cut back only 20% – we’d make a serious dent in the need to build more power plants and power lines.

    This is really back to the old “peak hour” issue.

    Power Plants have to be sized for “peak hour” – so do power lines.

    Imagine if folks didn’t even use solar – but just deferred dish and clothes washing to non-peak hours…

    With a Smart Meter – folks would have a real incentive to do so.

  18. Bubby: I stand corrected.

    I’ve never heard of solar panels lasting that long.

  19. I never said there wasn’t some benefit. I just don’t know how much.

    Whenever I hear too much good and no downside, then I start looking for the fraud in the story.

    I may be looking too much for the downside, but my experience says it is not likely.

    I don’t know what is a reasonable cost.

    So we get back to how much is any cost, and how valuable is any benefit.

    If we cut back 20% but it costs us 40% more than what we are doing now, then we are msiing out on spending that extra money on something else that might save more people.

    We are spending $68 billion a year on homeland security. Yes, it is true that almoust 2000 people died on 9/11, and it is a terrible thing. 2000 people die every year in swimming pool accidents.

    We know where the swimming ppols are, and we don’t know where the terrorists are. We know how to stop swimming pool accidents and we don’t know how to stop terrorists.

    So tell me, where is a better expenditure of $68 billion?

    How much cost is worth how much reduction in air pollution. If we increase our expenditures in air pollution reduction by 20%, and we reduce air pollution by 2%, is it worth it? If we reduce air pollution by 40%, is that worth it?

    Either way, I don’t know, and I have no way of knowing.

    I can take a rough guess. Evidence suggests taht as a society we value a human life at $500,000. How much do we have to spend before we reduce air pollution enough to save one human life? Then there are all the other costs, spoiled art work, cleaning buildings, etc.

    It is a lot of money. But in the end it is a question of how much we have in our pocket, and what we need to spend it on the most.

  20. What is going to happen when someone wants to put a solar array on his roof in a historic district?

    What is going to happen when someone wants to put one in his front yard because his roof doesn’t face south, and the community is controlled by the homeowners association?

  21. Jim Bacon Avatar

    Ray, What happens when someone wants to put a solar array on his roof in a historic district? I guess he gets turned down. Simple fact: Not everyone will be able to install solar-generating units. But…. so what? Some people will. There’s no silver bullet for our energy problems. Just a lot of partial solutions.

  22. Agreed. We have a lot of partial solutions, and we have a lot of technolgy that does work.

    The trick is to use them where and when they make sense. As oil gets more and more expensive, other technologies will suddenly becom a lot more affordable, and as they become more common they will also become cheaper.

    Eventually, they may become so cheap that we look back and sazy why didn’t we do this sooner? I supppose that is the point that some early advocates are making, “Gee, if we all did this, it would really make sense.”

    And they are right. I’s the IF part that causes trouble.

  23. Jim Bacon Avatar

    Ray, Right… I think we basically agree on this. And how do we know when a particular technology makes sense? The only way to know is to let the marketplace decide. That is not a decision the government should make. Government policy, to my mind, should be to get out of the way — eliminate barriers to energy conservation and energy production, consistent with protecting the environment from further degradation.

  24. Regardless, this power line controversy is going to be fun to watch.

    PEC holds the position that the power line is only needed for a few hours on the peak days, and that this requirement can be met by demand management. Furthermore the requirement is driven by new jobs and housing that may not materialize, and by the proposed shutdown of several existing generating plants.

    This makes it sound like we are trading local power plants and local pollution for pollution farther away, but with transmission lines, Which is pretty much what you stated in your post.

    But we can do away with the transmission lines crossing the propert of a few tens of thousands if a few million will cut back on their use of air conditioning during the hottest days of the summer.

    Or, as you point out, we can each spend a bundle of our own money to generate power closer to home. Or, maybe, the power company comes to some of us at the best locations and offers to install and maintain a cogeneration plant which will give us free heat as a byproduct. This would mean a shift in the way they do business, but you could proabably install a bunch of cogeneration for the same price as the power line.

    The cogeneration is a trade off by itself. You get to do away with the power line, and you have less pollution because you use the waste heat, but now you have a bunch of sites areound the city, each with their own pollution, and of course, this will mean more travel to maintain all those sites.

    I have no idea whatsoever, where the environmental high ground lies on this, and I sure don’t see how the market can make a decision based on anything like real knowledge. In such a case, what path is really consistent with protecting the environment from further degradation?

    This is going to come down to politics, not environmental considerations, and the politics will all boil down to NIMBY.

    This is where you have a reverse auction. All the land owners put up a bid for the amount of money they would be willing to pay NOT to have the power line cross their land. The Power company selects the route that combines the lowest cost of construction with the lowest bids for right of way.

    The losers get stuck with the power line, and they get all the money that was bid by everyone who didn’t get the power line. Because the power line is high, there would also be owners nearby who would get to participate in the pot to a lesser extent.

    This way, you have a solution that is both political and economical.

  25. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    An article in WaPo this morning indicated that “you might pay 46 cents for a kilowatt-hour of solar energy, but only 8 or 9 cents a kilowatt-hour from the power company.”

    So.. if your electric bill was $100 dollars for coal, it might be $600 a month for solar.

    Yeah.. that would be an eye opener!

    Read the rest of the article if you get time. It sorta describes how to live like you’re in a 3rd world country
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111400979.html

    however.. they point out that “we” are 5% of the world and much of the rest of the world actually lives closer to the way these self-imposed “off-grid” folks live…

    AND they point out that China .. expects to build 500 – yes 500 coal-powered plants (that probably will not use pollution controls).

    But .. for us – it’s not an either/or proposition. We could easily cut 10-20% of our consumption just by using more energy efficient devices. We could cut even more if we used Smart Meters that would incentivize using power in off-peak periods.

    This is where business and the market do not determine what is best. Power Companies WANT to produce more power to sell just like gasoline companies like to sell more gasoline… even though in both cases there is a huge downside to society as a whole – external costs that don’t affect the businesses at all.

  26. Agreed.

    I lived on my boat with nothing but solar, wind, and battery power. (OK, I charged the battery with the engine, too, if I was running the engine.)

    You can do it, but it is a pain in the rear, you MUST not waste power, it’s expensive, AND you have to do your own maintenance.

    How will you convince some guy in a condo 50 miles away to turn down the AC 20% on the hottest day of the year, just so some rich clowns won’t lose their pristine view? What is the condo owner looking at, another Condo?

    Assuming you can do that, how are you going to do it consistently, every time there is a hot day, and also do it several million times?

    That seems like a hard sell to me.

    The good news about condos is that you only have run off from one roof. The bad news is you haven’t got enough roof for solar.

  27. Agreed.

    I lived on my boat with nothing but solar, wind, and battery power. (OK, I charged the battery with the engine, too, if I was running the engine.)

    You can do it, but it is a pain in the rear, you MUST not waste power, it’s expensive, AND you have to do your own maintenance.

    How will you convince some guy in a condo 50 miles away to turn down the AC 20% on the hottest day of the year, just so some rich clowns won’t lose their pristine view? What is the condo owner looking at, another Condo?

    Assuming you can do that, how are you going to do it consistently, every time there is a hot day, and also do it several million times?

    That seems like a hard sell to me.

    The good news about condos is that you only have run off from one roof. The bad news is you haven’t got enough roof for solar.

  28. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Rappahannock Electric offers free water heater repairs in exchange for letting them place a “black box” on your water heater. This box blocks power to it during peak hours. Usually what happens.. is you take your shower but then it takes longer to recover… because it defers power until the peak load is past.

    In Europe – they use tankless water heaters – cold water heated ONLY when you want Hot.

    Florescent lights and LEDs last 7+ years longer and burn less energy…

    Modern front-load washing machines wring twice as much water out of the clothes BEFORE they go into the dryer.

    Heat Pumps .. called “water furnaces” cycle water through pipes in the soil… much more efficient that “air” heat pumps.

    It’s been estimated that just the above strategies would take 20% right off the top…

    I think most folks want to do their part… they just don’t want to go broke in the process or huddle together in a cold/dark house… eating… cold food…

  29. I use a ground source heat pump, what you call a water furnace. It works fine and it is quiet, no roaring fan while you are outside enjoying your deck. My biggest problem that it was a royal pain in the rear to get it past the building inspectors, and it cost about $3500 more than the regular type. Finding someone to service it is not easy, either.

    The new screw in fluorescent bulbs work fine, but I discovered that without the heat from the light bulbs, my heat pump ran more.

    The tankless water heaters are great, also used on boats.

    These are ideas that actually work, and cost only a little more than the standard technologies. Ideas like these are far more practical than solar panels.

    But the best energy saver is just to go around you house and plug up the places that allow infiltration. You can get someone with an infrared camera to take pictures of your house to show where the leaks are.

  30. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Smart meters let you do that with your power.

    You can shut everything down.. then start turning things on.. to see how it increases your overall..

    you can also establish what your “baseline” is…

    so then if you’re thinking about replacing a refrigerator or a water heater – you know how much power it is using and you can go shopping for one that uses less power. (I know you can do this by looking at labels also but try to find that info on your old fridge).

    Also – Rappahannock Electric does energy audits.. I think Dominion does also…

    The problem with all of these things… is where do you just do education .. and let folks voluntarily make changes and where do you let the market work and where do you put regs and laws in place?

  31. Where do you put regs and laws in place?

    Consider the toilet situation. Some organization decided we should have a law that limits the amount of water used to flush.

    The result is a black market in Canadian toilets. The result is more clogged sewr lines, because they were designed with a slope based on a certain amount of water. The result is more double flushes.

    Whereas in France, which is certainly no model of a free market, toilets come with two buttons for a choice of flush volume.

    Je ne se Quois.

  32. Anonymous Avatar

    can anyone tell me where the loudoun sub station mentioned in the discussion is located, by what subdivision, intersection or other landmark?

Leave a Reply