The first three are active solar systems, which use mechanical or electrical devices that convert the sun's heat or light to another form of usable energy. Passive solar buildings are designed and oriented to collect, store, and distribute the heat energy from sunlight to maintain the comfort of the occupants without the use of moving parts or electronics.
So does it make a difference what type of electrical generator we can use to produce wind power. The simple answer is both Yes and No, as it all depends upon the type of system and application you want. The low voltage DC output from a generator or older style dynamo can be used to charge batteries while the higher AC sinusoidal output from an alternator can be connected directly to the local grid.
Many companies are taking the push for 100 percent renewables seriously because they see it as good business — not just today, but for the long term. At the time of publication, 152 companies of various sizes have made a commitment to go 100 percent renewable through RE100. Big names like Apple and Google have already met their targets, while other companies are looking out further into the future, some as far as 2040. That timeline indicates companies are looking beyond today’s prices and present-day marketing benefits.
Anaerobic digestion, geothermal power, wind power, small-scale hydropower, solar energy, biomass power, tidal power, wave power, and some forms of nuclear power (ones which are able to "burn" nuclear waste through a process known as nuclear transmutation, such as an Integral Fast Reactor, and therefore belong in the "Green Energy" category). Some definitions may also include power derived from the incineration of waste.
The picture the company is using to sell this on Amazon is not of the turbine they are selling, but a picture of the best-selling South-West Windpower Air X turbine and I bought this item believing it to be this turbine. I also have one of these turbines which has run faultlessly now for 7 years. I am very disappointed with the Sunforce and often feel like throwing into the sea! It's a piece of junk!!
Cleaner air and water: Burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases (GHG) into the atmosphere. GHG contribute to global climate change, rising sea levels and unpredictable weather patterns that can be costly in terms of human and economic losses. Burning fossil fuels also releases contaminants in to the air and water near the power generation source. Alternative energy sources can produce the same electricity in a greener way. You can shrink your carbon footprint, help curb climate change and reduce air and water pollution when you choose renewable electricity.
Some people, including Greenpeace founder and first member Patrick Moore,[67][68][69] George Monbiot,[70] Bill Gates[71] and James Lovelock[72] have specifically classified nuclear power as green energy. Others, including Greenpeace's Phil Radford[73][74] disagree, claiming that the problems associated with radioactive waste and the risk of nuclear accidents (such as the Chernobyl disaster) pose an unacceptable risk to the environment and to humanity. However, newer nuclear reactor designs are capable of utilizing what is now deemed "nuclear waste" until it is no longer (or dramatically less) dangerous, and have design features that greatly minimize the possibility of a nuclear accident. These designs have yet to be commercialized. (See: Molten salt reactor)
Climate change concerns coupled with high oil prices and increasing government support are driving increasing rates of investment in the sustainable energy industries, according to a trend analysis from the United Nations Environment Programme. According to UNEP, global investment in sustainable energy in 2007 was higher than previous levels, with $148 billion of new money raised in 2007, an increase of 60% over 2006. Total financial transactions in sustainable energy, including acquisition activity, was $204 billion.[64]
At Bodine-Scott, our renewable energy options have helped dozens of local homes and businesses reduce their utility bills and any negative environmental impact from the use of traditional energy sources. Our technicians are NABCEP-certified experts, and we keep all of our staff informed and up to date on the latest developments in the solar industries. Our average customer sees a 50 percent reduction in utility costs, to say nothing of the invaluable reduction in environmental impact that comes from using clean energy. If you are serious about making an investment in the future of your home and the Earth, contact us today to speak with one of our renewable energy experts.
Concentrating solar power plants with wet-cooling systems, on the other hand, have the highest water-consumption intensities of any conventional type of electric power plant; only fossil-fuel plants with carbon-capture and storage may have higher water intensities.[135] A 2013 study comparing various sources of electricity found that the median water consumption during operations of concentrating solar power plants with wet cooling was 810 ga/MWhr for power tower plants and 890 gal/MWhr for trough plants. This was higher than the operational water consumption (with cooling towers) for nuclear (720 gal/MWhr), coal (530 gal/MWhr), or natural gas (210).[134] A 2011 study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory came to similar conclusions: for power plants with cooling towers, water consumption during operations was 865 gal/MWhr for CSP trough, 786 gal/MWhr for CSP tower, 687 gal/MWhr for coal, 672 gal/MWhr for nuclear, and 198 gal/MWhr for natural gas.[136] The Solar Energy Industries Association noted that the Nevada Solar One trough CSP plant consumes 850 gal/MWhr.[137] The issue of water consumption is heightened because CSP plants are often located in arid environments where water is scarce.
Green Pricing is an optional utility service for customers who want to help expand the production and distribution of renewable energy technologies. With green pricing, you do not have to change your electricity provider. Instead, customers choose to pay a premium on their electricity bill to cover the extra cost of purchasing clean, sustainable energy. As of March 2006, more than 600 utilities, electricity providers in 36 states offer a green pricing option.
“[The maps] suggest that our 100 percent renewable energy purchasing goal — which relies on buying surplus renewable energy when it’s sunny and windy, to offset the lack of renewable energy supply in other situations — is an important first step toward achieving a fully carbon-free future,” Michael Terrell, Google’s head of energy markets, wrote in a blog post. “Ultimately, we aspire to source carbon-free energy for our operations in all places, at all times.”
Previously, the largest U.S. city fully powered by renewables was Burlington, Vermont (pop. 42,000), home to Senator Bernie Sanders, the jam band Phish and the original Ben & Jerry’s. Georgetown’s feat is all the more dramatic because it demolishes the notion that sustainability is synonymous with socialism and GMO-free ice cream. “You think of climate change and renewable energy, from a political standpoint, on the left-hand side of the spectrum, and what I’ve done is toss all those partisan political thoughts aside,” Ross says. “We’re doing this because it’s good for our citizens. Cheaper electricity is better. Clean energy is better than fossil fuels.”
The early development of solar technologies starting in the 1860s was driven by an expectation that coal would soon become scarce. Charles Fritts installed the world's first rooftop photovoltaic solar array, using 1%-efficient selenium cells, on a New York City roof in 1884.[28] However, development of solar technologies stagnated in the early 20th century in the face of the increasing availability, economy, and utility of coal and petroleum.[29] In 1974 it was estimated that only six private homes in all of North America were entirely heated or cooled by functional solar power systems.[30] The 1973 oil embargo and 1979 energy crisis caused a reorganization of energy policies around the world and brought renewed attention to developing solar technologies.[31][32] Deployment strategies focused on incentive programs such as the Federal Photovoltaic Utilization Program in the US and the Sunshine Program in Japan. Other efforts included the formation of research facilities in the United States (SERI, now NREL), Japan (NEDO), and Germany (Fraunhofer–ISE).[33] Between 1970 and 1983 installations of photovoltaic systems grew rapidly, but falling oil prices in the early 1980s moderated the growth of photovoltaics from 1984 to 1996.
Wind-to-rotor efficiency (including rotor blade friction and drag) are among the factors impacting the final price of wind power.[16] Further inefficiencies, such as gearbox losses, generator and converter losses, reduce the power delivered by a wind turbine. To protect components from undue wear, extracted power is held constant above the rated operating speed as theoretical power increases at the cube of wind speed, further reducing theoretical efficiency. In 2001, commercial utility-connected turbines deliver 75% to 80% of the Betz limit of power extractable from the wind, at rated operating speed.[17][18][needs update]
The waste we generate ends up in landfills, where it decomposes and produces landfill gas made of approximately 50 percent methane. This gas can be captured and used to fuel electric generators. Since large landfills must burn off this gas to reduce the hazards arising from gas buildup, this method of renewable energy is one of the most successful.
Subsequently, Spain, Italy, Greece—that enjoyed an early success with domestic solar-thermal installations for hot water needs—and France introduced feed-in tariffs. None have replicated the programmed decrease of FIT in new contracts though, making the German incentive relatively less and less attractive compared to other countries. The French and Greek FIT offer a high premium (EUR 0.55/kWh) for building integrated systems. California, Greece, France and Italy have 30–50% more insolation than Germany making them financially more attractive. The Greek domestic "solar roof" programme (adopted in June 2009 for installations up to 10 kW) has internal rates of return of 10–15% at current commercial installation costs, which, furthermore, is tax free.
Another economic measure, closely related to the energy payback time, is the energy returned on energy invested (EROEI) or energy return on investment (EROI),[131] which is the ratio of electricity generated divided by the energy required to build and maintain the equipment. (This is not the same as the economic return on investment (ROI), which varies according to local energy prices, subsidies available and metering techniques.) With expected lifetimes of 30 years,[132] the EROEI of PV systems are in the range of 10 to 30, thus generating enough energy over their lifetimes to reproduce themselves many times (6–31 reproductions) depending on what type of material, balance of system (BOS), and the geographic location of the system.[133]
A solar power tower uses an array of tracking reflectors (heliostats) to concentrate light on a central receiver atop a tower. Power towers can achieve higher (thermal-to-electricity conversion) efficiency than linear tracking CSP schemes and better energy storage capability than dish stirling technologies.[14] The PS10 Solar Power Plant and PS20 solar power plant are examples of this technology.
×