Why are Urban Houses STILL on the GRID??

> 10 years ago
Reply
Register to post, see what you've read, and subscribe to topics.
cisco
cisco
QLD
12365 posts
QLD, 12365 posts
28 Jan 2012 1:22am
Thirty five years ago the C.S.I.R.O. conducted an experiment to ascertain whether modern urban homes could be independant of the power grid or not.

In Can'tberra (did I spell that right?), a city not known for an abundance of sunlight, or intelligence, they built a home with all the modern conveniences of the day (lighting, cooking, fridge, washing machine etc) and set it up to be independant of the power grid.

The systems put in place were backed up by an automatic start up diesel power plant in a shed at the rear of the house.

The experiment ran for a full year and at no time did the diesel power plant start up.

How do I know this?? Because the ABC ran a programme on television publishing the results of the experiment and I happened to be watching it that night.

You can search the C.S.I.R.O. and ABC web sites and you will not find any reference to it. WHY????.........What happened to the data????

The experiment proved that the only need for the power grid and base load power generation is for:-

1. Essential services.
2. Industry.
3. High density occupation buildings. ie office and apartment buildings.

Undisputedly the technology used 35 years ago has been improved upon so one HAS to ASK.......... WHY are Urban Houses STILL on the GRID??

The answer is that we have been CONNED. We are subsidising multinational industries on their power use to say the least.

None of you are going to give me the "conspiracy theory" shyte on this one because I know what I saw.

Anybody know more about this than I??
Poida
Poida
WA
1922 posts
WA, 1922 posts
28 Jan 2012 12:14pm
What's the price to setup the system?
Sailhack
Sailhack
VIC
5000 posts
VIC, 5000 posts
28 Jan 2012 3:15pm
cisco said...



Anybody know more about this than I??


Maybe PM33?

I fully agree with you Cisco...but what can we do about it? Riot, strike, fast? Or have a gripe on a watersports website forum until it's argued out of existence, then go back to what we were doing before the topic was raised.

Hmmm.....(baa)
gs12
gs12
WA
426 posts
WA, 426 posts
28 Jan 2012 12:31pm

Anybody know more about this than I??


It costs more money than connecting the house to the grid. Plain and simple.

I'm sure if you want to disconnect your own house and spend the $$$ to get this installed nobody would stop you. But are you willing to pay for it from your own pocket?

At a guess government probably feels they should be spending money elsewhere (hospitals, education, roads and other stuff they deem better use of tax payers money ).
d1
d1
WA
304 posts
d1 d1
WA, 304 posts
28 Jan 2012 12:45pm
It's not a conspiracy, just normal market economics.

To be fully grid-independent, you need to meet your current energy needs. Let's assume you'll go with PV (photovoltaic) solar, as this is currently the most applicable technology.

The daily energy you need in summer is roughly (peak period):
12 kW/h for the pool pump+chlorinator (1500W running 8 hours per day)
7.5 kW/h for the evap (but if you live in a place more humid than WA, multiply this by 5 as you'll be using a proper heatpump-based and very energy-hungry reverse-cycle aircon)
2.5 kW/h for energy-efficient lighting
5 kW/h everything else (fridge, music+tv, etc...)
let's assume cooking and hot-water are through natural gas.

Total: 27 kW/h per day. Looking at my utility bill - sounds about normal.

Now let's dimension your solar system:
Assuming 8 hours of sunlight at 80% average insolation.
Assuming you are using the best PV panels money can get (Sunpower 318's?) that are 19.5% efficient.
Assuming peak solar irradiation per square metre is 1 kW.
Assuming inverter efficiency of 98%.
You need about 14 panels - a 4.5 kW system.
You need 25m2 of North-facing, sun-lit area (roof?).
You need heaps of lead-acid battery backup capable of storing about 10 kW/h or energy (if your pool pump and aircon are set to work during the day time). You will need lots of indoor space for the batteries!
This should cover your needs 95% of the time, but for the remaining cloudy days, you need a backup diesel generator.
The inverter needs to be really fancy, in order to control the batteries AND the diesel genny.

I'm not in this business, but my guess is that it will set you back $30000 minimum. However, this will not add nearly as much value to your house, so it's a very poor capital investment. I don't have Excel around to do the PV/FV calculations, but I suspect you can settle your regular electricity bills for about 20 years, given the current value of $30k. After 20 years, your photovoltaic system will need replacement anyway.

It just doesn't make financial sense. Makes more sense to go for a grid-tie system that covers the majority of your daytime peak demands only, and can pay itself back after 8-10 years or so...
ginger pom
ginger pom
VIC
1746 posts
VIC, 1746 posts
28 Jan 2012 5:29pm
It's a great idea but people won't always see the financial benefit immediately....

[he says, knowing that he is going to the gym and unclicking "shooting the breeze" now anyway]

What we need is a brave government that could put through some sort of tax on energy so that these things are more obviously viable. Obviously people and coal companies may not support it, and many people would criticise it, but it would be great for the country....
SandS
SandS
VIC
5904 posts
VIC, 5904 posts
28 Jan 2012 5:42pm
One reason may be that nearly every house is running a 3 kw air con unit .

It is possible to set up a small solar 12 volt set up and occasionally run an inverter for washing machine and other power hungry devices .

But we are all too accustomed to chewing through the power now it seems .
kiteboy dave
kiteboy dave
QLD
6525 posts
QLD, 6525 posts
28 Jan 2012 10:50pm
Chill out there's like 5 types of paint-on solar power generators being developed. A much cheaper, more flexible, and environmental solution than current units.
Gestalt
Gestalt
QLD
14969 posts
QLD, 14969 posts
28 Jan 2012 11:42pm
i designed a house about 2 years ago that was completely off grid. full solar/battery, grey and black water recycling, rainwater harvesting, natural ventilation, 80% approx recycled building materials, solar hot water, heat exchange stove. the world could stop and this place would be self sufficient

i think 40k was in the ball park from memory maybe a little more or less, it was a while ago...
rainwater tanks are not part of that cost as they are required by code and this place also needed bushfire tanks.

it becomes economical for remote/rural applications.
for eg running power up the side of a mountain or onto a large property can cost 30k or more.

it's old news really and no conspiracy,

the cutting edge stuff is applying the concepts to high rise buildings. about 4 years ago i did a 6 star high rise building. rainwater harvesting, greywater, green walls, green roofs, a/c fancoils used to ventilate carparking, naturally ventilation where possible. never got built unfortunately. 6 star was a marketting angle prior to the gfc.

this building was design about 8 years ago
www.gbca.org.au/uploads/73/1609/Brisbane_Square.pdf
cisco
cisco
QLD
12365 posts
QLD, 12365 posts
29 Jan 2012 2:39am
d1 said...

It's not a conspiracy, just normal market economics.

To be fully grid-independent, you need to meet your current energy needs. Let's assume you'll go with PV (photovoltaic) solar, as this is currently the most applicable technology.

The daily energy you need in summer is roughly (peak period):
12 kW/h for the pool pump+chlorinator (1500W running 8 hours per day)
7.5 kW/h for the evap (but if you live in a place more humid than WA, multiply this by 5 as you'll be using a proper heatpump-based and very energy-hungry reverse-cycle aircon)
2.5 kW/h for energy-efficient lighting
5 kW/h everything else (fridge, music+tv, etc...)
let's assume cooking and hot-water are through natural gas.

Total: 27 kW/h per day. Looking at my utility bill - sounds about normal.

Now let's dimension your solar system:
Assuming 8 hours of sunlight at 80% average insolation.
Assuming you are using the best PV panels money can get (Sunpower 318's?) that are 19.5% efficient.
Assuming peak solar irradiation per square metre is 1 kW.
Assuming inverter efficiency of 98%.
You need about 14 panels - a 4.5 kW system.
You need 25m2 of North-facing, sun-lit area (roof?).
You need heaps of lead-acid battery backup capable of storing about 10 kW/h or energy (if your pool pump and aircon are set to work during the day time). You will need lots of indoor space for the batteries!
This should cover your needs 95% of the time, but for the remaining cloudy days, you need a backup diesel generator.
The inverter needs to be really fancy, in order to control the batteries AND the diesel genny.

I'm not in this business, but my guess is that it will set you back $30000 minimum. However, this will not add nearly as much value to your house, so it's a very poor capital investment. I don't have Excel around to do the PV/FV calculations, but I suspect you can settle your regular electricity bills for about 20 years, given the current value of $30k. After 20 years, your photovoltaic system will need replacement anyway.

It just doesn't make financial sense. Makes more sense to go for a grid-tie system that covers the majority of your daytime peak demands only, and can pay itself back after 8-10 years or so...


Thanks for that comprehensive response.

Let's take out the pool and air conditioners as they are not essentials. Proper insulation and ventilation and visits to the municipal pool eliminate them.

Let's also take out the nonsensical and egotistical crap that we are sold by the multi-media such as home theartres, dish washers (you married one didn't you?), coffee machines, etc, etc, etc.

For a reasonably sophistical life style energy needs are for lighting, heating of food and water, cooling of food and drink and multimedia entertainment (TV, internet etc.).

Electricity is one of the most, if not the most inefficient forms of energy.

Gas is about THE most efficient form of energy which by ignition transforms directly from chemical energy to heat energy and by clever use one can cool with it. Electrolux gas fridges are very efficient.

Lighting and entertainment can be run on low voltage supply. People living on yachts have been doing it for years.

So do we stay on the grid just because of our washing machines and tools in our sheds that are quite easily powered by a small generator??

petermac33
petermac33
WA
6415 posts
WA, 6415 posts
29 Jan 2012 1:51am
I got my monthly $30 phone line rental cut off.

Tomorrow, going to put my gas hot water system down to vaccation.

Healthy anyway to have a cold shower.

I now turn off my large amplifier and t.v off when not in use.....bloody private corporatists have us in servitude, REPCO in the process.

Now they're planning to nuke us,the poor souls on the grid with the smart meters,not all about money you know.

According to William Deagle interviewed on Jeff Rense, the radiation omitted from these smart meters compared to a mobile phone is like a candle compared to a flame thrower.
Mobydisc
Mobydisc
NSW
9029 posts
NSW, 9029 posts
29 Jan 2012 6:22am
Houses in more isolated areas go off the grid because it costs something like $15K a pole to get the power connected if you are on a farm. If five or more poles are needed then its probably worth considering not going on the grid.

The grid is not a bad thing. It allows the management of electricty. As technology improves more households will be generating electricity. It is envisioned when electric cars become more common they will become intelligent energy banks. They will store cheap electricity that is generated when demand is low and supply is high, for example in the middle of the night and then sell that electricity when demand is high and supply is low, for example when its 45 degrees C and two coal fired power generators break down.A grid will allow this to happen.

Urban houses will stay on the grid for the forseeable future as technology will push the importance of the grid. In more remote areas then yes its fair enough to get a house off the grid if its financially viable.

There is nothing stopping you from taking your house off the grid if you want besides the fact that life at home will be a lot harder. Cancel your electricity account. Tell the company to disconnect. Do what you have to do to get by without being on the grid.

I don't think its a conspiracy that the CSIRO house faded away. That house probably cost ten times more to build than a normal house. This sort of promo is still around today. A NSW electricity company runs a competition where you can live in an energy efficicient house for six months rent free. The house apparently generates energy to power two other houses besides itself. If it wasn't on the grid the excess power would be wasted.
GreenGriff
GreenGriff
SA
137 posts
SA, 137 posts
29 Jan 2012 6:50am
sounds good to me I think i paid about $870 last quarter so 15- 30k dun look so bad really
Dawso
Dawso
NSW
72 posts
NSW, 72 posts
29 Jan 2012 9:19am
GreenGriff said...

sounds good to me I think i paid about $870 last quarter so 15- 30k dun look so bad really


If you're using that much power you cant go solar or you'll be needing a $70k + investment, to go stand alone solar you need to be really power frugal ie. no air-con, heating and only natural ventilation no fans etc.

If the infrastructure is there why would you even consider not being connected to the grid when there's the option to go a grid connected PV system where with a 5kW system most people will have no power bill.

I personally would like to see most Australian houses with a solar array on the roof.

One other point (a bit off topic sorry) I would like to say about the rising price of power in Australia is its actually still very cheap when you consider Australia's low population and enormous area, remembering 80% of the cost of power is in the distribution ie. poles and wires.


Ian K
Ian K
WA
4170 posts
WA, 4170 posts
29 Jan 2012 6:43am
cisco said...



Thanks for that comprehensive response.

Let's take out the ....


Don't forget the energy you'll need to charge the Holden Volt.

gibberjoe
gibberjoe
SA
956 posts
SA, 956 posts
29 Jan 2012 9:19am

with all the modern caravan electrics [12v] it would have to be an advantage

to wire a house to 12volt electrics. in days of old 1950's we had a dunlite 32v

home power system. Running about 4 hrs an lister [generator] and rest of day

from batteries. It was not so dear to do..........
Gwendy
Gwendy
SA
472 posts
SA, 472 posts
29 Jan 2012 11:33am
Theres a lot of propaganda getting around at the momment about the merits of alternative energy. I for one would love to have an efficient system and save a fortune and the planet, Its just so difficult to sort the facts from fiction.

couple of years ago there was a documentary called who killed the electric car. It raved on about how great these cars were and greedy big business killing it off. Fact is that the experiment failed because batteries are an inefficient way to store electrical energy and still are.

An example. I know a person who bought a prius not long after they were introduced. She became a total pain at social functions as she would seek people out with big cars and acuse them of planet murder. After a year and a half when she was on the verge of breaking even with the extra perchase cost the batteries failed and the replacement cost of them was more than the cars worth. All she achieved with this vehicle was a pile of evil nickel cadmium in landfill.

I'm yet to be convinced a rooftop solar panel will ever produce the energy it took to manufacture it and get it on the roof. Where will they end up in 10 or 20 years when they're buggered. These things are just moving the problem to China.

I fully agree with the development of alternative power sources and I realise it can only happen with constant development. I am worried about the mass manufacture of inefficient technology to pay for it.
d1
d1
WA
304 posts
d1 d1
WA, 304 posts
29 Jan 2012 9:04am
cisco said...
Electricity is one of the most, if not the most inefficient forms of energy.

Gas is about THE most efficient form of energy which by ignition transforms directly from chemical energy to heat energy and by clever use one can cool with it. Electrolux gas fridges are very efficient.

Lighting and entertainment can be run on low voltage supply. People living on yachts have been doing it for years.

So do we stay on the grid just because of our washing machines and tools in our sheds that are quite easily powered by a small generator??


Some energy engineers out there might point out that there is no such thing as inefficient energy. The efficiency plays role in the conversion from one form of energy into another, and you a correct about the high efficiency of the direct conversion of chemical energy into thermal, in the case of natural gas. However, a fairly current issue is greenhouse gas emissions that are generated during the conversion of energy. In this respect, electricity generated through renewable resources is much better than using natural gas to heat your shower or cool your food.

Low voltage lighting requires proportionately more current in order to achieve the same candlepower, effetively requiring the same amount of energy (watts=volts*amps). However, low voltage is at a disadvantage when transmitted over a distance due to powerline losses. It is true that low voltage halogen lights have better spectral characteristics then the high-voltage types (i.e. - are closer in light to the sun), but this should not be confused with brightness.

Having a small generator power every house is especially inefficient, expensive, and dirty. A large power plant can achieve much better efficiency and importantly, much lower greenhouse gas emissions. Well, that's the theory at least, although the coal-powered reality here is another story altogether... Sorry, the wind just picked up!
Thecopterdr
Thecopterdr
QLD
98 posts
QLD, 98 posts
29 Jan 2012 12:59pm
"WHY are Urban Houses STILL on the GRID??

The answer is that we have been CONNED. We are subsidising multinational industries on their power use to say the least."

And you've only realized this now?
Go and read the Book "Suppressed Inventions and other ideas" , Its enough to make you cry.
Mr float
Mr float
NSW
3452 posts
NSW, 3452 posts
29 Jan 2012 8:27pm
d1 said...

It's not a conspiracy, just normal market economics.

To be fully grid-independent, you need to meet your current energy needs. Let's assume you'll go with PV (photovoltaic) solar, as this is currently the most applicable technology.

The daily energy you need in summer is roughly (peak period):
12 kW/h for the pool pump+chlorinator (1500W running 8 hours per day)
7.5 kW/h for the evap (but if you live in a place more humid than WA, multiply this by 5 as you'll be using a proper heatpump-based and very energy-hungry reverse-cycle aircon)
2.5 kW/h for energy-efficient lighting
5 kW/h everything else (fridge, music+tv, etc...)
let's assume cooking and hot-water are through natural gas.

Total: 27 kW/h per day. Looking at my utility bill - sounds about normal.

Now let's dimension your solar system:
Assuming 8 hours of sunlight at 80% average insolation.
Assuming you are using the best PV panels money can get (Sunpower 318's?) that are 19.5% efficient.
Assuming peak solar irradiation per square metre is 1 kW.
Assuming inverter efficiency of 98%.
You need about 14 panels - a 4.5 kW system.
You need 25m2 of North-facing, sun-lit area (roof?).
You need heaps of lead-acid battery backup capable of storing about 10 kW/h or energy (if your pool pump and aircon are set to work during the day time). You will need lots of indoor space for the batteries!
This should cover your needs 95% of the time, but for the remaining cloudy days, you need a backup diesel generator.
The inverter needs to be really fancy, in order to control the batteries AND the diesel genny.

I'm not in this business, but my guess is that it will set you back $30000 minimum. However, this will not add nearly as much value to your house, so it's a very poor capital investment. I don't have Excel around to do the PV/FV calculations, but I suspect you can settle your regular electricity bills for about 20 years, given the current value of $30k. After 20 years, your photovoltaic system will need replacement anyway.

It just doesn't make financial sense. Makes more sense to go for a grid-tie system that covers the majority of your daytime peak demands only, and can pay itself back after 8-10 years or so...


I run my cafe on half that with some careful usage of appliances and power.I run my house on a quarter f that
Carantoc
Carantoc
WA
7298 posts
WA, 7298 posts
29 Jan 2012 5:54pm
And WHY ARE URBAN HOUSES STILL BEING CONNECTED TO THE NBN GRID, whether you want it or not.

We have also been conned into believing

A) it will cost only $36 billion
B) it will mean you never have to visit a hospital again as you can do surgery over the net
C) it is essential for modern life
D) you need it to be able to download software that will calculate your grid power usage

And WHY ARE URBAN AREAS CONNECTED TO HIGHWAYS ?

I saw a TV programme years ago that said by 2000 we would all have personnal hoverboards and teleporters. Yet this technology has been sidelined in favour of cars, busses and roads.

And WHY ARE URBAN HOMES CONNECTED TO THE SEWERAGE SYSTEM ?

450 years ago the entire city of London did not have a central sewerage system. Yet we are still being hoodwinked to believe that wallowing in a pool of your own faeces is somehow 'bad' for you.

Please Register, or first...
Topics Subscribe Reply