See www.SEIA.org if you want to learn what michief the California utilities are
up to now in trying to limit the private use of solar power.
k.


-----Original Message-----
From: murdoch [mailto:murdoch@...]
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 2:01 PM
To: BREKINLA@...
Cc: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] San Diego SDG+E Renewable Electricity
(not)


On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 16:40:20 EST, you wrote:

>Go around all of them and participate in the states renewable buydown
>program. I did it with a wind mill. Net metering and hooking up to the grid
>has already been worked out. Solar is your option and San Diego is a great
>place to do it. Do it now before the governor figures out a way to raid the
>funds in the program. Brek

Thanks for what is undoubtedly an excellent suggestion, except that I
live in a large complex where the board members simply are not capable
of giving rational consideration to installation of such hardware....
unless you're suggesting something different than what I understand?

I am trying to move to a house that I could own so that I could have
more freedom to make decisions over such matters as installing solar
energy or windmills, net metering negotiations, installation of an EV
charger and tinkering in a garage with an EV or making my own biofuels
or any number of other renewable-related projects.

I think that, with the numbers of people living in attached dwellings
such as myself, this is sort of an un-covered story, as to the
difficulties they face in attempting to implement progressive
technologies.

I went back and read my first response to the green tag idea, and I
think I was rude to Tom's response, because in fact I seemed a bit
dismissive in my original reaction.  I think maybe it would be the
right compromise for me and perhaps others in my boat, for now, until
I am able to get someday to my own house.

MM

==========================================================
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
----------------------------------------------------------
. Please feel free to send your input to:
   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
. Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
. To view previous messages from the list,
   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
   (and read it on the Web), go to
   http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
. This e-mail discussion list is managed by
   the American Wind Energy Association:
   http://www.awea.org
----------------------------------------------------------


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 20:14:20 -0800, you wrote:

>See www.SEIA.org if you want to learn what michief the California utilities are
up to now in trying to limit the private use of solar power.
>k.

Whoa!  Thx for the info.  I sensed that SDG+E (Sempra), et. al. were not
progressive in their policies, but this is ridiculous!

ksmith@... wrote:
> See www.SEIA.org if you want to learn what michief the California utilities
are up to now in trying to limit the private use of solar power.
> k.


They want to charge anyone producing non-utility electricity 2 to 3
cents a KWH? That is if you have a wind generator, solar cells, are any
other private source of electricity, they want to charge you 2 to 3
cents a KWH to compensate them for the electricity you are not buying
from them? Of course they same principle was already followed during the
initial (idiotic) deregulation when CA utilities were allowed to charge
"stranded" costs to their customers.

This sort of thing is why anyone who thinks renewables are simply a
business or technical issue are wrong. Large powerful corporations put a
lot of political and economic muscle into opposing them Until renewables
(including efficiency, the biggest renewable of them all) become a
poltical movement, renewables will constantly be thwarted by other
players in the money+politics game.

ksmith@... wrote:
> See www.SEIA.org if you want to learn what michief the California utilities
are up to now in trying to limit the private use of solar power.
> k.


Oops - the utilties want to charge you 2 to 5 cents per KWH, for
generating your own electricity instead of buying theirs. 2 to 3 cents
was a typo on my part.

At 07:05 PM 1/31/2003 +0100, HEINZ.WENZL@... wrote:
>Spinning reserve is a necessity for any grid.

Yes.

>  If your grid is strong, then a
>few Megawatt of wind power do not matter.

Yes.  Or a few hundred MW--it depends on the size of the grid.

>  However, if the percentage of wind
>power to conventional electricity generation increases, then additional
>spinning reserve has to be provided.

Yes, but it's not a large amount--something like 2% of the total wind
capacity that is operational, e.g., 2-3 MW for a 100-MW wind plant.
And my guess is that the percentage level should decline as the total
amount of wind increases, because 1,000 wind turbines will be more
geographically dispersed and provide more consistent energy production
than 10 wind turbines.

>  Your very goo approach of predicting the
>output one hour ahead is irrelevant in this context.

Correct.  Hour-ahead forecasting has to do not with spinning reserve,
but with moving various generation sources on and off line to deal
with shifts in system load and generator availability.  They are two
separate issues, as the original message indicates.  In the U.S., we
are moving toward an hour-ahead market also.  For more on this and
related issues, see
http://www.awea.org/policy/documents/Transmissionwhitepaper12-2002.pdf

>You need to think in
>scales of adding or subracting a few MW within e.g. 6 seconds.

Only for the spinning reserve issue.

Tom Gray
Deputy Executive Director/Director of Communications
American Wind Energy Association
PO Box 1008
Norwich, VT 05055
(802) 649-2112 (voice)
(802) 649-2113 (fax)
tomgray@...

>  This is really
>expensive. Look at the Australian power exchange under ancillary serv ices.
>If I remember correctly the going rate for adding of subracting 1 MW within 6
>seconds for every second of the year is approx. 30 - 50 000 US$ per MW. The
>energy that you may have to deliver within such a contractual year may be 1
>or two MWh! The rather fictitious value of 30 000 US$ / MWh shows that this
>is very expensive.
>
>I believe that in all grids spinning reserve is supplied and managed by the
>grid operator and charged back as a "Use of the system" cost.
>
>Good luck
>
>-------------------------------------------------
>
>"arihalos " schrieb:
>
> > People,
> >
> > Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying to develop
> > the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
> >
> > We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as well as the
> > scheme for its sale on an open market.  In our case, we have to
> > predict our output and make this known to the system operator on an
> > hourly basis.  We would like to know how this is done in other
> > countries.
> >
> > Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be supported
> > by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants.  We would
> > like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the spinning
> > reserve.
> >
> > I would appreciate inputs such as references to other websites or
> > written material. Thank you.

http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html/2003/01/31/33350.php?sp1=rgj&sp2=News&sp3=L\
ocal+News

February 1, 2003
Bush ties alternative energy research to Arctic drilling money
Associated Press
1/31/2003 05:10 pm

President Bush's new budget anticipates $2.4 billion in oil lease sales in
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by 2005, with half the money to be
spent to research solar, wind, geothermal and other alternative energy, an
assistant secretary said Friday.

The proposal to spend $1.2 billion in lease sales on research of renewable
energies _ part of Bush's pending budget blueprint for fiscal year 2004 _
should help temper opposition to drilling in arctic Alaska, said Rebecca
Watson, assistant interior secretary for land and minerals management.

"One would hope that it would,"Watson told The Associated Press. She said
it was the first time the administration had proposed spending the proceeds
from the oil sales directly on alternative power research.

"It fits with the president's national energy policy, which is a balanced
approach looking at increasing domestic fossil fuels but also looking ahead
to renewable energy,"she said in a telephone interview from Washington.

"Renewable energy faces some hurdles from a financial standpoint so it
needs some more money for research. This type of a proposal would be a big
boost,"she said.

Last year, the Republican-led House approved opening ANWR to drilling but
the proposal died in the Democratic-run Senate. This year, both chambers
are controlled by Republicans and the measure is back on the White House's
agenda.

Critics of the drilling swiftly denounced the idea of sweetening the pot
with more than $1 billion for research in renewable energy.

"It is ridiculous to pretend the only way to have renewable energy is to
drill in the arctic,"said Bruce Hamilton, national conservation director
for the Sierra Club.

"Anybody with an environmental conscience can see right through it,"he said
Friday from group headquarters in San Francisco.

Even with the GOP taking over,"there isn't sufficient turnover in the
Senate to open up the Arctic unless some people who have been voting with
us decide to turn against us,"Hamilton said.

"There will be a number of people who voted against the drilling last round
who will be under extreme pressure to switch their vote,"he said.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is a big backer of geothermal energy in Nevada and
loud opponent of ANWR drilling and would not change his position even with
the money for more research, his press secretary Tessa Hafen said.

Reid intends to reintroduce legislation this year that would provide a
production tax credit as an incentive for geothermal power, Hafen said.

"There are lots of ways of boosting renewables without tying it to
something with ANWR,"she said."It does not have to be either or."

Aides to Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and Alaska Gov. Frank Murkowski in
Anchorage _ two supporters of ANWR drilling _ said Friday there was no one
immediately available to comment.

The Bureau of Land Management's current budget invests $1.5 million in
renewable energy, including solar, wind, geothermal and others _ double
what it spent the previous year, Watson said.

Bush's new budget for FY 2004 beginning Oct. 1, 2003, proposes another
$550,000 increase dedicated to geothermal power, Watson said. An $300,000
increase also is planned to facilitate wind and solar power on public land,
she said.

"It is welcome support,"she said."You can see that $1.2 billion would be an
enormous jump start."

"Just in my time here there has been quite a bit of increased interest in
geothermal, especially in California and Nevada,"said Watson, a Montana
lawyer who joined the administration a year ago.

"Right now, geothermal provides about 5 percent of California's total
electricity. If California was a country, it would be the fifth largest in
the world, so that is not insignificant,"she said.

Interior Secretary Gale Norton toured a geothermal plant near Reno last
summer, expressing President Bush's strong support for the growing
renewable energy source as a way to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Nevada is a leading source of geothermal energy because of its numerous
mountain ranges, each bordered by underground faults that are the primary
source of the hot water that is turned into to steam to power turbines.

Norton said in July that geothermal power accounts for about 17 percent of
the nation's renewable energy _ including solar and wind power _ but only
about three-tenths of 1 percent of the total U.S. energy supply.

"That is not very much but it is a fast growing field,"she said, up from
500 megawatts of installed capacity nationally in 1973 to 2,300 megawatts
today.

İ Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co. Inc. Newspaper. Use of this
site signifies agreement to our terms of service (updated 12/17/2002).

In Northern Germany and Denmark the situation is such that energy flow
is from the wind turbines to the high voltage grid under conditions of
low demand AND high winds. Obviously this is the complete reversal of
"normal grid operating conditions. As yet this is no problem as the
technical requirements for connecting a wind turbine to the grid demand
a sufficiently sitff grid, low impedance, high short ciruit power -
whatever you want to call it. Remember that the Western European grid
has probably more than 50 GW of spinning reserves and the simultaneous
loss of two large power stations (i.e. 2000 MW) is a non-event!

The further large scale increase of wind power (there is planning for
ca. 50 GW offshore wind) will only be possible by connecting the wind
generators directly to an area of high electricity consumption (i.e. a
DC transmission line, new high voltage systems, etc.

In your case the biggest problems are likely to occur at high winds when
all wind turbines have to be cut off simultaneously. Organising a
schedule of switching the system off would help.

Of course, your installation will lower grid losses from the central
grid to consumers near your wind farm and  it will also increase grid
stabilty as long as your second by second power fluctuations lie within
a certain range. There is some complicated grid mathematics ahead of
you!

Heinz

---------------------

Ari Luis Halos schrieb:

> Heinz,
>
> Thanks for the advise.  I think it's pretty much worse in our
> situation.  We're tapping to the grid at a point at the edge of the
> grid.  This is hundreds of kilometers away from the demand center.
> I'm curious if in northern Germany if this has been the situation and
> if it was necessary to install a peaking unit near the substations
> there.
>
> Ari
>
>  Heinz Wenzl <Heinz.Wenzl@...> wrote:
>
>      Spinning reserve is a necessity for any grid. If your grid
>      is strong, then a
>      few Megawatt of wind power do not matter. However, if the
>      percentage of wind
>      power to conventional electricity generation increases, then
>      additional
>      spinning reserve has to be provided. Your very goo approach
>      of predicting the
>      output one hour ahead is irrelevant in this context. You
>      need to think in
>      scales of adding or subracting a few MW within e.g. 6
>      seconds. This is really
>      expensive. Look at the Australian power exchange under
>      ancillary serv ices.
>      If I remember correctly the going rate for adding of
>      subracting 1 MW within 6
>      seconds for every second of the year is approx. 30 - 50 000
>      US$ per MW. The
>      energy that you may have to deliver within such a
>      contractual year may be 1
>      or two MWh! The rather fictitious value of 30 000 US$ / MWh
>      shows that this
>      is very expensive.
>
>      I believe that in all grids spinning reserve is supplied and
>      managed by the
>      grid operator and charged back as a "Use of the system"
>      cost.
>
>      Good luck
>
>      -------------------------------------------------
>
>      "arihalos " schrieb:
>
>      > People,
>      >
>      > Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying
>      to develop
>      > the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
>      >
>      > We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as
>      well as the
>      > scheme for its sale on an open market. In our case, we
>      have to
>      > predict our output and make this known to the system
>      operator on an
>      > hourly basis. We would like to know how this is done in
>      other
>      > countries.
>      >
>      > Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be
>      supported
>      > by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants. We
>      would
>      > like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the
>      spinning
>      > reserve.
>      >
>      > I would appreciate inputs such as references to other
>      websites or
>      > written material. Thank you.
>      >
>      > ==========================================================
>
>      > THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
>      > ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>      > . Please feel free to send your input to:
>      > renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
>      > . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
>      > renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>      > . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      > renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>      > . To view previous messages from the list,
>      > subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
>      > or stop receiving the list by e-mail
>      > (and read it on the Web), go to
>      > http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
>      > . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
>      > the American Wind Energy Association:
>      > http://www.awea.org
>      > ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>      >
>      >
>      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>      begin:vcard
>      n:Wenzl;Heinz
>      tel;fax:+49 5522 919173
>      tel;work:+49 5522 919170
>      x-mozilla-html:FALSE
>      org:Beratung für Batterien und Energietechnik;Tel: +49 5522
>      919170
>      adr:;;Am Bergwäldchen 27;Osterode;;D - 37520;Germany
>      version:2.1
>      email;internet:heinz.wenzl@...
>      title:Dr.
>      fn:Heinz Wenzl
>      end:vcard
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There is more and more experience in Denmark and the North of Germany as regards
grid stability with high wind penetration. Once you have widely dispersed wind
farms, things beomce a little easier, because individual power fluctuations even
out very well and the demand for spinning reserve may even decrease (after all,
there is no danger of one line or one power station failing and the risk of
suddenly no wind or worse, all turbines being shut off due to high wind, becomes
negligible!). Now the large utilities in Denmark and North Germany use weather
forecasts to plan their production schedule, and power stations of a few hundred
MW are not operated under high wind conditions. Wind is a firm capacity here!
But
you need to get to this stage first.

Tom, you may be right that 1 or 2 MW so spinning reserve for 100 MW wind may be
sufficient, but 2 MW of spinning reserve is really expensive - and were to put
it.
You need to go into the calculation of local grid resonances and impedance
values
- all outside my field of experience.

Heinz

--------------------------

Tom Gray schrieb:

> At 07:05 PM 1/31/2003 +0100, HEINZ.WENZL@... wrote:
> >Spinning reserve is a necessity for any grid.
>
> Yes.
>
> >  If your grid is strong, then a
> >few Megawatt of wind power do not matter.
>
> Yes.  Or a few hundred MW--it depends on the size of the grid.
>
> >  However, if the percentage of wind
> >power to conventional electricity generation increases, then additional
> >spinning reserve has to be provided.
>
> Yes, but it's not a large amount--something like 2% of the total wind
> capacity that is operational, e.g., 2-3 MW for a 100-MW wind plant.
> And my guess is that the percentage level should decline as the total
> amount of wind increases, because 1,000 wind turbines will be more
> geographically dispersed and provide more consistent energy production
> than 10 wind turbines.
>
> >  Your very goo approach of predicting the
> >output one hour ahead is irrelevant in this context.
>
> Correct.  Hour-ahead forecasting has to do not with spinning reserve,
> but with moving various generation sources on and off line to deal
> with shifts in system load and generator availability.  They are two
> separate issues, as the original message indicates.  In the U.S., we
> are moving toward an hour-ahead market also.  For more on this and
> related issues, see
> http://www.awea.org/policy/documents/Transmissionwhitepaper12-2002.pdf
>
> >You need to think in
> >scales of adding or subracting a few MW within e.g. 6 seconds.
>
> Only for the spinning reserve issue.
>
> Tom Gray
> Deputy Executive Director/Director of Communications
> American Wind Energy Association
> PO Box 1008
> Norwich, VT 05055
> (802) 649-2112 (voice)
> (802) 649-2113 (fax)
> tomgray@...
>
> >  This is really
> >expensive. Look at the Australian power exchange under ancillary serv ices.
> >If I remember correctly the going rate for adding of subracting 1 MW within 6
> >seconds for every second of the year is approx. 30 - 50 000 US$ per MW. The
> >energy that you may have to deliver within such a contractual year may be 1
> >or two MWh! The rather fictitious value of 30 000 US$ / MWh shows that this
> >is very expensive.
> >
> >I believe that in all grids spinning reserve is supplied and managed by the
> >grid operator and charged back as a "Use of the system" cost.
> >
> >Good luck
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------
> >
> >"arihalos " schrieb:
> >
> > > People,
> > >
> > > Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying to develop
> > > the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
> > >
> > > We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as well as the
> > > scheme for its sale on an open market.  In our case, we have to
> > > predict our output and make this known to the system operator on an
> > > hourly basis.  We would like to know how this is done in other
> > > countries.
> > >
> > > Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be supported
> > > by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants.  We would
> > > like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the spinning
> > > reserve.
> > >
> > > I would appreciate inputs such as references to other websites or
> > > written material. Thank you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

New changes, new pictures.

Cleaner Burning, Higher output.

No smoke, no carbon buildup.

Heat your house, garage, or hot water. Even make a steam generator from new
or used vegetable oil.

http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/babington


Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter
& Discussion Boards. Read about Sustainable Technology:
http://www.green-trust.org
sspence@...

there will be a new conference about clean energy in munic in november...
where thy specialy show dna-technologies...and there is a summary
about the worldmarket for clean energy ...renewable energy..for 200 us dollar
at ......www.hkc22.com
for more..ask me...please..
adrian....
  Steve Spence <sspence@...> wrote:New changes, new pictures.

Cleaner Burning, Higher output.

No smoke, no carbon buildup.

Heat your house, garage, or hot water. Even make a steam generator from new
or used vegetable oil.

http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/babington


Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter
& Discussion Boards. Read about Sustainable Technology:
http://www.green-trust.org
sspence@...


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

==========================================================
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
----------------------------------------------------------
. Please feel free to send your input to:
   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
. Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
. To view previous messages from the list,
   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
   (and read it on the Web), go to
   http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
. This e-mail discussion list is managed by
   the American Wind Energy Association:
   http://www.awea.org
----------------------------------------------------------


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Gesendet von http://mail.yahoo.de.
Bis zu 100 MB Speicher bei http://premiummail.yahoo.de.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

As I have said before, the way to harness wind is to use the wind to compress
"wet compressed air" (WCA) and then run the air through the turbines of a
conventional electric generating plant, preferably a decommissioned nuclear
plant, because the turbines at nuclear plants are designed for saturated
steam.  Since WCA can be stored efficiently,  the instantaneous power output
of the plant  does not depend on the wind energy available at any instant but
on the stored energy available, averaged over weeks.  The spinning reserve
issue more or less goes away.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

esbuck@... wrote:
>>As I have said before, the way to harness wind is to use the wind to
compress
"wet compressed air" <<

Can you point to some references on the use of wet compressed air storage
systems and their performance?

Many thanks,
Neil Adams

There are many ways to store wind energy.  All significantly increase its cost.
Whether the increase is less than the cost of added spinning reserve is an open
question.

Also, when utilities have storage capacity, they tend to want to use it to run
baseload nuclear and coal plants as much as possible, then use the power that
is stored during periods of low demand to meet demand peaks.

At present, there is no techno way to just wave a magic wand and convert
the world to wind energy--it's going to take a series of policies aimed at
supporting clean energy.

Tom

At 03:35 PM 2/2/2003 -0500, esbuck@... wrote:

>As I have said before, the way to harness wind is to use the wind to compress
>"wet compressed air" (WCA) and then run the air through the turbines of a
>conventional electric generating plant, preferably a decommissioned nuclear
>plant, because the turbines at nuclear plants are designed for saturated
>steam.  Since WCA can be stored efficiently,  the instantaneous power output
>of the plant  does not depend on the wind energy available at any instant but
>on the stored energy available, averaged over weeks.  The spinning reserve
>issue more or less goes away.

Look at it like this. Converting high quality electricity from a wind
turbine to steam, hot or cold compressed air or, for that matter, using
it to charge a battery costs a lot of energy and a lot of investment. A
goo high voltage transmission line is much cheaper and does not have
such high losses. Now you might say that high voltage transmission lines
are not a particular beautiful feature in the environment. Fair enough.
But all the solutions above need them too, possibly with a slightly
smaller capacity.

I am sure that grid connected wind farms are operated most efficiently
and cheaply without any energy storage. Power storage i.e. spinning
reserve is different. An interesting point is of course that the
magintude of todays spinning reserve is largely determined by  the
biggest single failure in transmission and generation. A decentralised
generation system with wind has a much lower risk of sudden power loss
and ultimately therefore, even spinning reserve could be reduced.

For non grid connected wind systems from about 20 kW upwards a hot
compressed air system is the system of choice, I fully agree here. We
are in fact currently building one in the lab!

Heinz
-------------------------

ESBuck@... schrieb:

>
> As I have said before, the way to harness wind is to use the wind to
> compress "wet compressed air" (WCA) and then run the air through the
> turbines of a conventional electric generating plant, preferably a
> decommissioned nuclear plant, because the turbines at nuclear plants
> are designed for saturated steam.  Since WCA can be stored
> efficiently,  the instantaneous power output of the plant  does not
> depend on the wind energy available at any instant but on the stored
> energy available, averaged over weeks.  The spinning reserve issue
> more or less goes away.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear All,

How about a wind/diesel hybrid system with high penetration (say over 50%)?

We are currently carrying out a feasibility study to install wind turbines (100
kW) on a small island in Hong Kong.  The wind turbines will be coupled with
existing diesel generators by a hybrid control unit.  The control unit will
monitor the wind profile and system demand for maximization of wind energy. 
Where can I find the detail information for preparing a system specification
before tendering?

Yeung Lo



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Gray [mailto:tomgray@...]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 1:41 AM
To: esbuck@...; HEINZ.WENZL@...
Cc: arihalos@...; renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Dispatch of wind


There are many ways to store wind energy.  All significantly increase its cost.
Whether the increase is less than the cost of added spinning reserve is an open
question.

Also, when utilities have storage capacity, they tend to want to use it to run
baseload nuclear and coal plants as much as possible, then use the power that
is stored during periods of low demand to meet demand peaks.

At present, there is no techno way to just wave a magic wand and convert
the world to wind energy--it's going to take a series of policies aimed at
supporting clean energy.

Tom

At 03:35 PM 2/2/2003 -0500, esbuck@... wrote:

>As I have said before, the way to harness wind is to use the wind to compress
>"wet compressed air" (WCA) and then run the air through the turbines of a
>conventional electric generating plant, preferably a decommissioned nuclear
>plant, because the turbines at nuclear plants are designed for saturated
>steam.  Since WCA can be stored efficiently,  the instantaneous power output
>of the plant  does not depend on the wind energy available at any instant but
>on the stored energy available, averaged over weeks.  The spinning reserve
>issue more or less goes away.


==========================================================
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
----------------------------------------------------------
. Please feel free to send your input to:
   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
. Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
. To view previous messages from the list,
   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
   (and read it on the Web), go to
   http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
. This e-mail discussion list is managed by
   the American Wind Energy Association:
   http://www.awea.org
----------------------------------------------------------


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



***************************************************************
This message and any attachment are intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed
and contain information that is confidential and may be
privileged.  Any unauthorized decryption, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication by persons
other than the intended addressee or recipient is strictly
prohibited.  If you are not the addressee or you have
received this message and any attachment in error,
please notify the sender and remove them from your computer.

E-mail is an informal method of communication and not
suitable for creating legal relations.  Nothing contained in
this message may bind us so as to create or amend any
contract, constitute a representation or impose a duty of
care.
***************************************************************

Heinz/Tom ..all:

Do we have any technical references on spinning reserve requirements as
related to wind?  As we ramp up wind generation in our energy generation
mix, the issue is now forefront.

Thank You.

Ed Woolsey



"You see, we should make use of the forces of nature and should obtain all
our power in this way. Sunshine is a form of energy, wind and sea currents
are manifestations of this energy. Do we make use of them? Oh no! We burn
forests and coal, like tenants burning down our front door for heating. We
live like wild settlers and not as though these resources belong to us."
Thomas A. Edison, 1916

-----Original Message-----
From: HEINZ.WENZL@... [mailto:HEINZ.WENZL@...]
Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 4:47 AM
To: Tom Gray
Cc: arihalos <arihalos@...>; renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Dispatch of wind

There is more and more experience in Denmark and the North of Germany as
regards
grid stability with high wind penetration. Once you have widely dispersed
wind
farms, things beomce a little easier, because individual power fluctuations
even
out very well and the demand for spinning reserve may even decrease (after
all,
there is no danger of one line or one power station failing and the risk of
suddenly no wind or worse, all turbines being shut off due to high wind,
becomes
negligible!). Now the large utilities in Denmark and North Germany use
weather
forecasts to plan their production schedule, and power stations of a few
hundred
MW are not operated under high wind conditions. Wind is a firm capacity
here! But
you need to get to this stage first.

Tom, you may be right that 1 or 2 MW so spinning reserve for 100 MW wind may
be
sufficient, but 2 MW of spinning reserve is really expensive - and were to
put it.
You need to go into the calculation of local grid resonances and impedance
values
- all outside my field of experience.

Heinz

--------------------------

Tom Gray schrieb:

> At 07:05 PM 1/31/2003 +0100, HEINZ.WENZL@... wrote:
> >Spinning reserve is a necessity for any grid.
>
> Yes.
>
> >  If your grid is strong, then a
> >few Megawatt of wind power do not matter.
>
> Yes.  Or a few hundred MW--it depends on the size of the grid.
>
> >  However, if the percentage of wind
> >power to conventional electricity generation increases, then additional
> >spinning reserve has to be provided.
>
> Yes, but it's not a large amount--something like 2% of the total wind
> capacity that is operational, e.g., 2-3 MW for a 100-MW wind plant.
> And my guess is that the percentage level should decline as the total
> amount of wind increases, because 1,000 wind turbines will be more
> geographically dispersed and provide more consistent energy production
> than 10 wind turbines.
>
> >  Your very goo approach of predicting the
> >output one hour ahead is irrelevant in this context.
>
> Correct.  Hour-ahead forecasting has to do not with spinning reserve,
> but with moving various generation sources on and off line to deal
> with shifts in system load and generator availability.  They are two
> separate issues, as the original message indicates.  In the U.S., we
> are moving toward an hour-ahead market also.  For more on this and
> related issues, see
> http://www.awea.org/policy/documents/Transmissionwhitepaper12-2002.pdf
>
> >You need to think in
> >scales of adding or subracting a few MW within e.g. 6 seconds.
>
> Only for the spinning reserve issue.
>
> Tom Gray
> Deputy Executive Director/Director of Communications
> American Wind Energy Association
> PO Box 1008
> Norwich, VT 05055
> (802) 649-2112 (voice)
> (802) 649-2113 (fax)
> tomgray@...
>
> >  This is really
> >expensive. Look at the Australian power exchange under ancillary serv
ices.
> >If I remember correctly the going rate for adding of subracting 1 MW
within 6
> >seconds for every second of the year is approx. 30 - 50 000 US$ per MW.
The
> >energy that you may have to deliver within such a contractual year may be
1
> >or two MWh! The rather fictitious value of 30 000 US$ / MWh shows that
this
> >is very expensive.
> >
> >I believe that in all grids spinning reserve is supplied and managed by
the
> >grid operator and charged back as a "Use of the system" cost.
> >
> >Good luck
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------
> >
> >"arihalos " schrieb:
> >
> > > People,
> > >
> > > Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying to develop
> > > the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
> > >
> > > We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as well as the
> > > scheme for its sale on an open market.  In our case, we have to
> > > predict our output and make this known to the system operator on an
> > > hourly basis.  We would like to know how this is done in other
> > > countries.
> > >
> > > Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be supported
> > > by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants.  We would
> > > like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the spinning
> > > reserve.
> > >
> > > I would appreciate inputs such as references to other websites or
> > > written material. Thank you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=244396.2846622.4218523.2848452/D=egroupweb/S=17050832
69:HM/A=1414307/R=0/*https://www.clearcredit.com/registration/default.asp?n=
b&cpID=c01888p1379&ckID=gen14628>


==========================================================
THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
----------------------------------------------------------
. Please feel free to send your input to:
   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
. Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
. To view previous messages from the list,
   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
   (and read it on the Web), go to
   http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
. This e-mail discussion list is managed by
   the American Wind Energy Association:
   http://www.awea.org
----------------------------------------------------------


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi -we've discussed this before and a thought occurs to me. You have
indicated you don't have the funds for a working model of this. What
about a computer simulation? You sound like a guy who might have the
skills for simulation yourself. If not, I'll bet there is a local
engineering school with students who would love to tackle the simulation
for a project like this. A convincing simulation might convince someone
to supply the funds to build a working model. (A simulation would tell
you how thick the insulation would need to be to retain the heat to keep
it "wet compressed air" without condensation for a significant period of
time (say three days or a week). It would also tell you whether heat
loss through air ingress and egress hoses would be a problem, and in
general whether tiny insulation thermal "weak spots" would be an issue.
And it could give the preliminary answer to the efficiency question;
what portion of a KWH could expect to get out for each KWH you put in,
in practice.

esbuck@... wrote:
> As I have said before, the way to harness wind is to use the wind to compress
> "wet compressed air" (WCA) and then run the air through the turbines of a
> conventional electric generating plant, preferably a decommissioned nuclear
> plant, because the turbines at nuclear plants are designed for saturated
> steam.  Since WCA can be stored efficiently,  the instantaneous power output
> of the plant  does not depend on the wind energy available at any instant but
> on the stored energy available, averaged over weeks.  The spinning reserve
> issue more or less goes away.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ==========================================================
> THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> . Please feel free to send your input to:
>   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
>   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> . To view previous messages from the list,
>   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
>   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
>   (and read it on the Web), go to
>   http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
> . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
>   the American Wind Energy Association:
>   http://www.awea.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

I am not sure that we really know what we need to do to achieve grid
stability in wind dominated systems. As a group the power output over a
region can be planned fairly well it seems. There is a PhD student here
who is looking at the issue in terms of local grid resonance. The basi
idea is something like this.
You only need to strengthen the grid (or install spinning reserve, e.g.
a flywheel, battery, SMES, etc, at those points in the grid where
resosnace from wind input is likely to cuase a problem. It means a lot
of grid calculations.

Many years of research are ahead to solve the underlying mathematics.

Hope this helped.
-------------

Edward Woolsey schrieb:

> Heinz/Tom ..all:
> Do we have any technical references on spinning reserve requirements
> as related to wind?As we ramp up wind generation in our energy
> generation mix, the issue is now forefront.
>
> Thank You.
>
> Ed Woolsey
>
> “You see, we should make use of the forces of nature and should obtain
> all our power in this way. Sunshine is a form of energy, wind and sea
> currents are manifestations of this energy. Do we make use of them? Oh
> no! We burn forests and coal, like tenants burning down our front door
> for heating. We live like wild settlers and not as though these
> resources belong to us.“
>
> Thomas A. Edison, 1916
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HEINZ.WENZL@... [mailto:HEINZ.WENZL@...]
> Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 4:47 AM
> To: Tom Gray
> Cc: arihalos <arihalos@...>; renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Dispatch of wind
>
> There is more and more experience in Denmark and the North of Germany
> as regards
> grid stability with high wind penetration. Once you have widely
> dispersed wind
> farms, things beomce a little easier, because individual power
> fluctuations even
> out very well and the demand for spinning reserve may even decrease
> (after all,
> there is no danger of one line or one power station failing and the
> risk of
> suddenly no wind or worse, all turbines being shut off due to high
> wind, becomes
> negligible!). Now the large utilities in Denmark and North Germany use
> weather
> forecasts to plan their production schedule, and power stations of a
> few hundred
> MW are not operated under high wind conditions. Wind is a firm
> capacity here! But
> you need to get to this stage first.
>
> Tom, you may be right that 1 or 2 MW so spinning reserve for 100 MW
> wind may be
> sufficient, but 2 MW of spinning reserve is really expensive - and
> were to put it.
> You need to go into the calculation of local grid resonances and
> impedance values
> - all outside my field of experience.
>
> Heinz
>
> --------------------------
>
> Tom Gray schrieb:
>
> > At 07:05 PM 1/31/2003 +0100, HEINZ.WENZL@... wrote:
> > >Spinning reserve is a necessity for any grid.
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > >  If your grid is strong, then a
> > >few Megawatt of wind power do not matter.
> >
> > Yes.  Or a few hundred MW--it depends on the size of the grid.
> >
> > >  However, if the percentage of wind
> > >power to conventional electricity generation increases, then
> additional
> > >spinning reserve has to be provided.
> >
> > Yes, but it's not a large amount--something like 2% of the total
> wind
> > capacity that is operational, e.g., 2-3 MW for a 100-MW wind plant.
> > And my guess is that the percentage level should decline as the
> total
> > amount of wind increases, because 1,000 wind turbines will be more
> > geographically dispersed and provide more consistent energy
> production
> > than 10 wind turbines.
> >
> > >  Your very goo approach of predicting the
> > >output one hour ahead is irrelevant in this context.
> >
> > Correct.  Hour-ahead forecasting has to do not with spinning
> reserve,
> > but with moving various generation sources on and off line to deal
> > with shifts in system load and generator availability.  They are two
>
> > separate issues, as the original message indicates.  In the U.S., we
>
> > are moving toward an hour-ahead market also.  For more on this and
> > related issues, see
> >
> http://www.awea.org/policy/documents/Transmissionwhitepaper12-2002.pdf
>
> >
> > >You need to think in
> > >scales of adding or subracting a few MW within e.g. 6 seconds.
> >
> > Only for the spinning reserve issue.
> >
> > Tom Gray
> > Deputy Executive Director/Director of Communications
> > American Wind Energy Association
> > PO Box 1008
> > Norwich, VT 05055
> > (802) 649-2112 (voice)
> > (802) 649-2113 (fax)
> > tomgray@...
> >
> > >  This is really
> > >expensive. Look at the Australian power exchange under ancillary
> serv ices.
> > >If I remember correctly the going rate for adding of subracting 1
> MW within 6
> > >seconds for every second of the year is approx. 30 - 50 000 US$ per
> MW. The
> > >energy that you may have to deliver within such a contractual year
> may be 1
> > >or two MWh! The rather fictitious value of 30 000 US$ / MWh shows
> that this
> > >is very expensive.
> > >
> > >I believe that in all grids spinning reserve is supplied and
> managed by the
> > >grid operator and charged back as a "Use of the system" cost.
> > >
> > >Good luck
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >"arihalos " schrieb:
> > >
> > > > People,
> > > >
> > > > Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying to
> develop
> > > > the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
> > > >
> > > > We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as well
> as the
> > > > scheme for its sale on an open market.  In our case, we have to
> > > > predict our output and make this known to the system operator on
> an
> > > > hourly basis.  We would like to know how this is done in other
> > > > countries.
> > > >
> > > > Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be
> supported
> > > > by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants.  We
> would
> > > > like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the
> spinning
> > > > reserve.
> > > >
> > > > I would appreciate inputs such as references to other websites
> or
> > > > written material. Thank you.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                         ADVERTISEMENT
                             [Image]
   [Image]
>
>
> ==========================================================
> THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> . Please feel free to send your input to:
>   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
>   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> . To view previous messages from the list,
>   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
>   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
>   (and read it on the Web), go to
>   http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
> . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
>   the American Wind Energy Association:
>   http://www.awea.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

.......for my money, I would rather invest it in any number of technologies
giving a real commercial return around my home, while saving tens of kg of
greenhouse gas emissions, (or tens of grams(?) of accumulated fissile waste
materials).

How about bicycling instead of driving a car? - also saves on health club fees.
Retrofit double glazing has a quick payback time, as do most good brands of
compact fluorescent light bulbs.

Solar hot water in the southwestern US should also have a good payback time, and
is five to TEN TIMES better than PVs as a way of reducing greenhosue gas
emissions, per dollar invested.

Somehow or  other, it seems to me that spin doctoring by vested interests is
again exploiting consumer guilt over global warming: they are getting us to part
with our hard-earned dollars, spending it on the wrong technologies. Meanwhile,
per capita emissions and absolute emission levels continue to spiral "out of
control" (!) to the profit of quasi-monopolistic energy utilities.

When I have done all that, *and* persuaded all my neighbours to copy my example,
if we have any spare cash left over, then we can demand - from very high moral
ground - that our local utility sell green power.


;-)



             \               Dr Michael Gunter MB,BS
              \
               \______       Owner - Operator of the
               /|            Breamlea Wind Generator:
              / |            100,000 kilowatt-hours a year
             /  |            of Green Power
                |
                |            Email:      mickgg@...
                |            WWW:        http://www.voltscommissar.net
                |
                |
_______________|_____________________________________________________

I'm writing to you from Türkiye.I hope you and all friends are very well.
Don't let me keep you.I'm studying about heat pump(especially ground sourced
heat pump).I haven't got to much books,catalogue ...Can you help about in this
field?Can you send me some catalogue or any other sources?

Thank you for everything...

Regards.......

Kürŝat ÜNLÜ
Mechanical Engineer,M.Sc.

Well, the information that I have shows that wind production sometimes
exceeds demand and wind energy is actually exported to the rest of the
grid. But it all happens within one "grid control zone" so the utility
is not really fussed too much.

Heinz

------------------------------------

Edward Woolsey schrieb:

> Heinz,
> Thank you for the reply.
>
> Don’t we have some pretty good experience from N. Germany and areas in
> Denmark?
>
> If I remember correctly, Holstein was over 70% wind on some days.
>
> Ed Woolsey
>
> “You see, we should make use of the forces of nature and should obtain
> all our power in this way. Sunshine is a form of energy, wind and sea
> currents are manifestations of this energy. Do we make use of them? Oh
> no! We burn forests and coal, like tenants burning down our front door
> for heating. We live like wild settlers and not as though these
> resources belong to us.“
>
> Thomas A. Edison, 1916
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Heinz Wenzl [mailto:Heinz.Wenzl@...]
> Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 4:36 PM
> To: woolsey@...
> Cc: 'Tom Gray'; arihalos@...; renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Dispatch of wind
>
> I am not sure that we really know what we need to do to achieve grid
> stability in wind dominated systems. As a group the power output over
> a region can be planned fairly well it seems. There is a PhD student
> here who is looking at the issue in terms of local grid resonance. The
> basi idea is something like this.
> You only need to strengthen the grid (or install spinning reserve,
> e.g. a flywheel, battery, SMES, etc, at those points in the grid where
> resosnace from wind input is likely to cuase a problem. It means a lot
> of grid calculations.
>
> Many years of research are ahead to solve the underlying mathematics.
>
> Hope this helped.
> -------------
>
> Edward Woolsey schrieb:
>
> Heinz/Tom ..all:
>
> Do we have any technical references on spinning reserve requirements
> as related to wind?As we ramp up wind generation in our energy
> generation mix, the issue is now forefront.
>
> Thank You.
>
> Ed Woolsey
>
> "You see, we should make use of the forces of nature and should obtain
> all our power in this way. Sunshine is a form of energy, wind and sea
> currents are manifestations of this energy. Do we make use of them? Oh
> no! We burn forests and coal, like tenants burning down our front door
> for heating. We live like wild settlers and not as though these
> resources belong to us."
>
> Thomas A. Edison, 1916
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HEINZ.WENZL@... [mailto:HEINZ.WENZL@...]
> Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 4:47 AM
> To: Tom Gray
> Cc: arihalos <arihalos@...>; renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [renewable-energy] Dispatch of wind
>
> There is more and more experience in Denmark and the North of Germany
> as regards
> grid stability with high wind penetration. Once you have widely
> dispersed wind
> farms, things beomce a little easier, because individual power
> fluctuations even
> out very well and the demand for spinning reserve may even decrease
> (after all,
> there is no danger of one line or one power station failing and the
> risk of
> suddenly no wind or worse, all turbines being shut off due to high
> wind, becomes
> negligible!). Now the large utilities in Denmark and North Germany use
> weather
> forecasts to plan their production schedule, and power stations of a
> few hundred
> MW are not operated under high wind conditions. Wind is a firm
> capacity here! But
> you need to get to this stage first.
>
> Tom, you may be right that 1 or 2 MW so spinning reserve for 100 MW
> wind may be
> sufficient, but 2 MW of spinning reserve is really expensive - and
> were to put it.
> You need to go into the calculation of local grid resonances and
> impedance values
> - all outside my field of experience.
>
> Heinz
>
> --------------------------
>
> Tom Gray schrieb:
>
> > At 07:05 PM 1/31/2003 +0100, HEINZ.WENZL@... wrote:
> > >Spinning reserve is a necessity for any grid.
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > >  If your grid is strong, then a
> > >few Megawatt of wind power do not matter.
> >
> > Yes.  Or a few hundred MW--it depends on the size of the grid.
> >
> > >  However, if the percentage of wind
> > >power to conventional electricity generation increases, then
> additional
> > >spinning reserve has to be provided.
> >
> > Yes, but it's not a large amount--something like 2% of the total
> wind
> > capacity that is operational, e.g., 2-3 MW for a 100-MW wind plant.
> > And my guess is that the percentage level should decline as the
> total
> > amount of wind increases, because 1,000 wind turbines will be more
> > geographically dispersed and provide more consistent energy
> production
> > than 10 wind turbines.
> >
> > >  Your very goo approach of predicting the
> > >output one hour ahead is irrelevant in this context.
> >
> > Correct.  Hour-ahead forecasting has to do not with spinning
> reserve,
> > but with moving various generation sources on and off line to deal
> > with shifts in system load and generator availability.  They are two
>
> > separate issues, as the original message indicates.  In the U.S., we
>
> > are moving toward an hour-ahead market also.  For more on this and
> > related issues, see
> >
> http://www.awea.org/policy/documents/Transmissionwhitepaper12-2002.pdf
>
> >
> > >You need to think in
> > >scales of adding or subracting a few MW within e.g. 6 seconds.
> >
> > Only for the spinning reserve issue.
> >
> > Tom Gray
> > Deputy Executive Director/Director of Communications
> > American Wind Energy Association
> > PO Box 1008
> > Norwich, VT 05055
> > (802) 649-2112 (voice)
> > (802) 649-2113 (fax)
> > tomgray@...
> >
> > >  This is really
> > >expensive. Look at the Australian power exchange under ancillary
> serv ices.
> > >If I remember correctly the going rate for adding of subracting 1
> MW within 6
> > >seconds for every second of the year is approx. 30 - 50 000 US$ per
> MW. The
> > >energy that you may have to deliver within such a contractual year
> may be 1
> > >or two MWh! The rather fictitious value of 30 000 US$ / MWh shows
> that this
> > >is very expensive.
> > >
> > >I believe that in all grids spinning reserve is supplied and
> managed by the
> > >grid operator and charged back as a "Use of the system" cost.
> > >
> > >Good luck
> > >
> > >-------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >"arihalos " schrieb:
> > >
> > > > People,
> > > >
> > > > Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying to
> develop
> > > > the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
> > > >
> > > > We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as well
> as the
> > > > scheme for its sale on an open market.  In our case, we have to
> > > > predict our output and make this known to the system operator on
> an
> > > > hourly basis.  We would like to know how this is done in other
> > > > countries.
> > > >
> > > > Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be
> supported
> > > > by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants.  We
> would
> > > > like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the
> spinning
> > > > reserve.
> > > >
> > > > I would appreciate inputs such as references to other websites
> or
> > > > written material. Thank you.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                         ADVERTISEMENT
                             [Image]
   [Image]
>
>
> ==========================================================
> THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> . Please feel free to send your input to:
>   renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
>   renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> . To view previous messages from the list,
>   subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
>   or stop receiving the list by e-mail
>   (and read it on the Web), go to
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
> . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
>   the American Wind Energy Association:
> http://www.awea.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Since all of us here are concerned about the environment enough to
want to do something, I would like to inform members about
CTCleanWater Society. It is a grassroots group that organizes river
clean ups in and around connecticut. The group is new thats why the
memebr base is low. Without clean water we cannot live. Visit the
group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CTCLEANWATER

Evidently this is to remove the trash floating on the river water (?). It truly
is a comment on our times. Even so, I have full confidence in the vitality and
self-correction ability of our democratic society to come to terms with our
excesses. Look for a future where the U.S. ship of state turns away from E=mc
squared commercially for full scale energy production everywhere but in small
labs that do their research work into the wonders of the atom as pure science
and without any fanfare. Where everyone accepts conservation and environmental
stewardship as a personal responsibility from the day they are born. Throwing
trash out of car windows included.

Every day I do my "stewardship of the commons" by once, just once, picking up a
piece of trash on the ground and carrying it with me until I find a suitable
receptacle for it. Every day. Just once. The world is round.

Thanks for everyone's time.
Knucks
IntegEner
Tehachapi, CA, The States
www.home.inreach.com/integener

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: harsh5235 <harsh5235@...>
   To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 9:26 PM
   Subject: [renewable-energy] CTCleanWater


   Since all of us here are concerned about the environment enough to
   want to do something, I would like to inform members about
   CTCleanWater Society. It is a grassroots group that organizes river
   clean ups in and around connecticut. The group is new thats why the
   memebr base is low. Without clean water we cannot live. Visit the
   group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CTCLEANWATER


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Edward,
It was my pleasure to be included in your mail list.  Your magazine had another
article that may be the solution to my problem - the virtual plant of Nordex and
the small inset on ABB's Microgrid-based virtual utilities concept.
I'm not sure if the latter is based on ABB's DC technologies.  They've got some
DC system running in Gottland in Sweden which has a lot of wind turbines
installed.  The only problem with that system is the high cost.
We've also had a demo by a Japanese battery company on their Vanadium battery. 
They've also got a system running on one of their remote islands, coupled with a
single wind turbine.  Again, the problem is cost - the cost of a 1MW output
Vanadium redox battery is about the same as a 1MW wind turbine.
In the long run, I think the virtual plant holds much promise because aside from
accommodating wind into the generation mix, it also addresses another problem of
utilities -- power losses.  The nice thing about small-scale RE technologies is
that you can install them close to demand, in the process reducing power losses.
Here in the Philippines, the systems losses of the grid operator (NAPOCOR)
averaged 8% for the last two years. That's 8% of power and the associated cost
down the drain.  If you can reduce this by even just 1% by locating a plant near
demand, thats at least 1% savings.
Anyway, I'd like to thank everybody for their contribution.  I really didn't
expect such an overwhelming response.  Now, I think that the operators of
conventional power plants should worry more about the spinning reserve.  You
see, for us, the loss of a 700MW facility is a major headache - enough for the
President of the country to axe the head of NAPOCOR.  You see, every time a
coal-fired power plant of Mirant (which they bought from Southern Energy, who in
turn bought the plants from Hopewell - whew!) experiences trouble, we get a
system-wide blackout!  No wonder the coal plants are so "hot to handle" (as you
can see with the frequent changes in ownership).  A loss of a 800 kW wind
turbine or sudden decline in the wind is chickenfeed compared to that.
What was also helpful was the info on AWEA and the CAISO.  Unlike in Europe, we
do not give special incentives to RE facilities.  In fact, we tax our geothermal
energy industry to near death! (I should know, my salary's isn't going up so
much because of that!)  So I think the post-PURPA CAISO situation, and their
solution for wind power dispatch scheduling would work fine in our situation. 
If there is anyone out there who's involved with CAISO, I'd really like to hear
from you.

  Edward Milford <edward.milford@...> wrote:Thanks for the reply - glad you
found it an interesting article, and your question at least allowed me to post
it to the group! good luck with your installations, and if you are thinking of
an article we would definitely be interested! Best wishes Edward
Edward Milford
James & James (Science Publishers) Ltd
8-12 Camden High Street
London NW1 0JH
Tel: +44 20 7387 8558
Fax: +44 20 7387 8998
www.jxj.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Ari Luis Halos [mailto:arihalos@...]
Sent: 04 February 2003 01:27
To: Edward Milford
Subject: RE: [renewable-energy] Dispatch of wind


Edward,
Thanks for the info.  I have a copy of the Renewable Energy World issue where
the article first came out (for which by the way I forgot to say thanks).
Anyway, the article prompted me to ask my question regarding the dispatch of
wind.  Mr. Jensen pointed out that they had problems with the high penetration
of bound generation units (wind and local CHP) that has led to power overflow
situations. It's a major concern in our country as we play host to a large
number of semiconductor plants and power quality is a major, major issue.
Hopefully we'd be able to build and successfully integrate the wind farm into
the grid.  Who knows, it may even be a subject of a magazine article.
  Edward Milford <edward.milford@...> wrote: We published an article on the
experience in Denmark of the integration of
wind (and CHP) into grids in our magazine Cogeneration and On-Site Power
Production. You can see if on our web site as well by following this link:

http://www.jxj.com/magsandj/cospp/2002_06/integrating_chp_wind.html

An earlier version appeared in our magazine Renewable Energy World, but we
do not put all of the articles on to our web site. Anybody not familiar with
that magazine can see it at

http://www.jxj.com/magsandj/rew/


Edward Milford
James & James (Science Publishers) Ltd
8-12 Camden High Street
London NW1 0JH
Tel: +44 20 7387 8558
Fax: +44 20 7387 8998
www.jxj.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: arihalos [mailto:arihalos@...]
> Sent: 30 January 2003 08:28
> To: renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [ enewable-energy] Dispatch of wind
>
>
> People,
>
> Our company, PNOC Energy Development Corporation is trying to develop
> the first wind farm in Southeast Asia.
>
> We are curious about the dispatch of wind in the grid, as well as the
> scheme for its sale on an open market. In our case, we have to
> predict our output and make this known to the system operator on an
> hourly basis. We would like to know how this is done in other
> countries.
>
> Another thing is that we heard that wind farms have to be supported
> by spinning reserves from diesel or hydro power plants. We would
> like to know if this is true and if so, who pays for the spinning
> reserve.
>
> I would appreciate inputs such as references to other websites or
> written material. Thank you.
>
>
> ==========================================================
> THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPA ING IN THE RENEWABLE ENERGY LIST.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> . Please feel free to send your input to:
> renewable-energy@yahoogroups.com
> . Join the list by sending a blank e-mail to:
> renewable-energy-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> . To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> renewable-energy-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> . To view previous messages from the list,
> subscribe to a daily digest of the list,
> or stop receiving the list by e-mail
> (and read it on the Web), go to
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/list/renewable-energy .
> . This e-mail discussion list is managed by
> the American Wind Energy Association:
> http://www.awea.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



Ari Luis C. Halos
Engineering Design epartment
PNOC - Energy Development Corporation, Energy Complex, Merritt Road
Fort Bonfacio, Makati City, Philippines 1200
tel. 8931320 ext. 4340
fax. 8401829

e-mail:arihalos@...


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now


Ari Luis C. Halos
Engineering Design Department
PNOC - Energy Development Corporation, Energy Complex, Merritt Road
Fort Bonfacio, Makati City, Philippines 1200
tel. 8931320 ext. 4340
fax. 8401829

e-mail:arihalos@...


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Environmentalists rule

Lawrence Solomon
National Post

Wednesday, February 05, 2003
ADVERTISEMENT

To the chagrin of many conservatives, environmentalists as a group have more
credibility than business executives, government officials, politicians,
journalists and -- apart from scientists -- just about everyone else that
public opinion pollsters compare them to.

This great confidence that the public shows in environmentalists, a
confidence that spans more than a decade and covers all manner of
environmental issues, stems overwhelmingly from one factor.

Environmentalists have generally been right in identifying serious
environmental problems, often spectacularly so.

Nuclear power provides one of the clearest examples of environmentalists
making clear-eyed analyses while everyone else was blinded by a business or
a technological euphoria. Throughout the 1950s and the 1960s, and well into
the 1970s, nuclear power had been virtually unquestioned as the fuel of the
future. Then some environmentalists began questioning the government's wild
projections of growth in electricity demand -- planners asserted the power
system would need to double every decade, indefinitely. These
environmentalists also questioned the industry's claims that nuclear
electricity would be "too cheap to meter," that nuclear accidents couldn't
occur, that radiation was benign and that there were no alternatives to
nuclear power. Most people, however, weren't alert to the looming disaster.
Scientists, business executives, governments, journalists, even oil industry
executives and the majority of environmentalists who didn't work on nuclear
issues, swallowed the industry's outlandish claims. Nuclear power's approval
ratings remained well above 90%.

Today, only a minority -- mostly among die-hard conservatives and nuclear
industry employees -- remains deluded. The environmental and economic
wreckage of the nuclear industry -- The Wall Street Journal, in the 1980s,
called its financial collapse the biggest in corporate history -- continues
to be felt in every jurisdiction that foolishly embraced the atom.

In other energy debates, environmentalists were right, and almost everyone
else was wrong, in recognizing that conservation and energy efficiency could
quickly and cost-effectively counter the OPEC oil crises of the 1970s.
Environmentalists were similarly ahead of almost everyone else in
recognizing that big dams could no longer be economically built, but that
co-generation and other small-scale power technologies, if allowed to
compete, would replace not only nuclear power but many of the dirty coal and
oil generating plants that the power monopolies favoured.

The extraordinary track record of environmentalists can also be seen in
pitched battles in other fields. Cities that listened to environmentalists
and cancelled expressways slated to destroy urban neighbourhoods now count
their blessings, while those that struggle with the many unanticipated
consequences of expressways count their costs. Cities that preserved their
heritage buildings and older neighbourhoods were rewarded with properties
that appreciated and contributed to their tax base; cities that converted
built-up blocks into parking lots, expecting new developments to spring up,
are still waiting.

Environmentalists correctly warned of the loss of the cod and other
fisheries, while most blithely accepted rosy projections by government and
industry experts. Environmentalists correctly criticize pollution from
large-scale farming operations, and embarrass large-scale farmers for their
dependence on subsidies, while conservatives pooh-pooh the costs of farm
pollution to neighbours and are oblivious to the large-farm sector's utter
dependence on subsidies.

Environmentalists aren't always right. Their record is spotty in condemning
this or that chemical, and particular groups, or particular people, have
remarkable losing streaks: the Worldwatch Institute's Lester Brown on global
famines, for example, or biologist Paul Ehrlich on the population explosion.
Neither can the many environmental groups funded by governments and unions,
such as the Canadian Environmental Law Association, be relied upon for
independent thinking. Neither can groups capitalizing on environmental
concerns to push separate agendas, such as nationalists like the Council of
Canadians.

But Greenpeace, the new international network of Waterkeepers and other
environmental groups that rely on small donations, unlike many of their
corporate-funded conservative critics, tend to be on the right side of
history. Because these environmental groups need public support for their
very survival, they have become expert at tailoring their message to the
public at large, helping them win the contest in the marketplace of ideas
over narrowly funded critics. At a defining moment in the history of nuclear
power -- the day Margaret Thatcher privatized the electricity industry --
Greenpeace UK, Friends of the Earth UK, and other broadly based UK
environmental groups were clinking champagne glasses. They knew that
Thatcher, by allowing competition and cutting the industry off from
open-ended government support, had signed the industry's death warrant.

The UK's conservative think-tanks, expecting a liberated nuclear industry to
flourish, also toasted Thatcher. When a privatized nuclear fleet, in the
form of a company called British Energy, later offered stock to the public,
they and their followers finally had the chance to invest in their darling.
These true believers then lost their shirts when British Energy went
bankrupt.

In contrast to environmentalists' exemplary record at diagnosing
environmental ills, their record in issuing prescriptions is abysmal. In the
case of global warming, environmentalists are certainly correct in asserting
that society generates economically and environmentally unjustifiable levels
of emissions, and just as certainly incorrect in backing the central
planning exercise that is Kyoto. Because Kyoto is so unworkable, saner
approaches will be adopted, saving society from burning money along with
fossil fuels. And adding another notch to the environmentalists' string of
successes.

Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Urban Renaissance Institute and
Consumer Policy Institute, divisions of Energy Probe Research Foundation.
E-mail: LawrenceSolomon@...
İ Copyright  2003 National Post

http://www.nationalpost.com/financialpost/story.html?id={1FBCCB4C-C40F-4306-BDA7\
-69AD5A21B510}

--
Hold the door for the stranger behind you.  When the driver a
half-car-length in front of you signals to get over, slow down.  Smile and
say "hi" to the folks you pass on the sidewalk.  Give blood.  Volunteer.



_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Here are some links that might be useful:

	 http://www.igshpa.okstate.edu/
	 http://www.northeastgeo.com/default.html

Alex Karahalios

On Tuesday, February 4, 2003, at 02:50  AM, <kursat@...>
wrote:

> I'm studying about heat pump(especially ground sourced heat pump).I
> haven't got to much books,catalogue ...Can you help about in this
> field?Can you send me some catalogue or any other sources?
>

Hydrogen Cars Remain Decades in the Future Under New Budget
By DANNY HAKIM (NYT)
The Bush administration plan to spur development of hydrogen cars does not
envision mass production until 2020.

ETROIT, Feb. 4 - The Bush administration plan to spur development of
hydrogen cars does not envision mass production until 2020. The plan also
says there will not be enough research and installations like fueling
stations to decide whether the technology is commercially viable until 2015.
Details of the initiatives were laid out in the 2004 budget, which was
released yesterday and included $273 million for research into hydrogen fuel
cells, as well as in material from the Energy Department.

The proposals include research on whether nuclear and coal power could be
used to create hydrogen, a strategy that environmental groups say would
undermine the benefits of hydrogen cars. But more money would go to
renewable energy.
Fuel cells generate electricity through a chemical reaction of hydrogen and
oxygen, and many automakers see the technology as an eventual replacement
for the internal combustion engine. Cars that run on fuel cells would have
water vapor as the sole tailpipe emission. The overall emissions would be
dictated by how the hydrogen was produced.
President Bush will offer further details of the plan on Thursday in a
speech at the National Building Museum in Washington. Energy Secretary
Spencer Abraham will give a speech here on Friday on the policy.
The administration plans to spend $1.7 billion over five years on two
projects, the FreedomCar, to explore making the technology work in cars, and
FreedomFuel, which will study how to produce, store and deliver hydrogen.
The military is also researching fuel cells.
Among the goals would be a demonstration fleet of fuel cell vehicles. Last
year, Toyota and Honda set up such fleets in California. Next year, $19.6
million would be spent on possibly using onboard re-formers to strip
hydrogen from gasoline and $28 million would go to research cheaper and more
efficient fuel cells.
Money would be earmarked to research internal combustion engines fueled by
hydrogen instead of gasoline, a technology that BMW and Ford have explored.
The administration has tried to court environmental groups by briefing them
about its initiatives, but the groups are increasingly skeptical.
"They need another zero on the end of their figures if they are serious
about realizing the promise of fuel cell vehicles," said David Friedman, a
senior expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

The 2020 production target would send effects of the program far into the
future, Mr. Friedman said.
"The average lifetime for a car is 15 years," he added. "So that's 30 years
before this program will significantly effect our oil dependence."


Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter
& Discussion Boards. Read about Sustainable Technology:
http://www.green-trust.org
sspence@...

Steve Spence
Subscribe to the Renewable Energy Newsletter
& Discussion Boards. Read about Sustainable Technology:
http://www.green-trust.org
sspence@...


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 14:01:11 -0800
>From: "Patrick Nye" <patricknye@...>
>To: "patrick nye" <patricknye@...>
>User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509
>Subject: Press Release - Record Year for Renewable Energy
>
>Greetings,
>
>The following is a press release regarding renewable energy in the Pacific
>Northwest from Portland's Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
>
>*****
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
>Contact:
>Pat Nye
>Bonneville Environmental Foundation
>503.248.1905
>patricknye@...
>
>
>Record Year for Northwest Renewable Resources Thanks to Support of
>Commercial Customers
>
>Bonneville Environmental Foundation posts significant increase in sales for
>2002 of Green Tags in support of Northwest wind and solar energy resources.
>
>February 4, 2003 (Portland, Ore) Portlandıs non-profit Bonneville
>Environmental Foundation (BEF) announced today a record increase in the
>number of Green Tags sold during 2002. Totaling over $700,000 Green Tags,
>sales made during 2002 represents a 471% increase over 2001 sales.
>
>BEFıs 2002 Green Tag sales equals the total annual energy output of
>approximately 35 large utility-scale wind turbines and were sourced from
>facilities across the Pacific Northwest. Through displacing an equal number
>of megawatt-hours from fossil fuel energy production, these renewable energy
>resources avoided over 40,000 tons of carbon emissions and other pollutants.
>
>Commercial accounts are a big factor in the increase over 2001. Oregon
>businesses such as Blue Heron Paper Co, West Linn Paper Co, Nike, Tektronix,
>SUMCO Oregon, Bear Creek Corp. and others have each made significant
>commitments to supporting the growth of renewable energy resources within
>Oregon and the entire Pacific Northwest.
>
>³The Foundation has been working to support and expand renewable energy
>resources since 1999. We developed the Green Tag just two years ago as an
>easy way for people to show their support of clean energy produced here in
>the Northwest² said Angus Duncan, BEF President. ³Our results from 2002
>prove that this strategy is gaining wider acceptance. We commend these
>forward-thinking businesses for helping us to change the makeup of our
>energy in the Northwest.²
>
>As a 501(c)(3) non-profit public benefit organization, all net-revenues from
>BEFıs Green Tags sales are reinvested into building additional renewable
>energy resources throughout the Northwest. Along with supporting
>utility-scale wind energy, an additional 100 kW of electricity from new
>solar resources has been added to the energy grid through BEFıs own
>projects. Recent projects include: Hanford Solar ­ White Bluffs WA, Brewery
>Blocks Solar ­ Portland OR and West Salem High School Solar ­ Salem OR.
>
>About BEF
>The Bonneville Environmental Foundation, a non-profit organization, was
>established in 1998 to further the development and use of new renewable
>energy resources. Through revenues generated from the sales of green power
>products, BEF funds projects that restore damaged watersheds and support new
>renewable energy projects from solar, wind and bio-mass. BEF pioneered the
>sale of Green Tags in 1999 and has helped establish national standards for
>certification and trading.  Created by regional environmental groups and the
>Bonneville Power Administration, the Foundation operates collaboratively but
>independent of both. Visit online at www.B-E-F.org
>
>####

Ill send you some, it will take a little time to get some english
language versions.

Heinz

ESBuck@... schrieb:

> In a message dated 2/3/2003 4:36:48 PM Central Standard Time,
> Heinz.Wenzl@... writes:
>
>
>> For non grid connected wind systems from about 20 kW upwards a hot
>> compressed air system is the system of choice, I fully agree here.
>> We are in fact currently building one in the lab!
>>
>
> Please do tell me more!  One doesn't need to drive the compressor
> electrically.  Couple it directly to the turbine.  For short
> distances, to a central generator, one can pipe the air.  Using a
> large, central storage tank reduces thermal losses.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hydrogen is a wonderful fuel.  However, the human mind is not ready for a
hydrogen fuel economy.  Some years ago a utility proposed a fuel cell
electricity generating plant on Manhattan Is.  The project was vetoed by the
New York City Fire Dept.   Does anyone think hydrogen fueled cars would be
allowed in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels?  Can you spell
H-i-n-d-e-n-b=u-r-g?  It does seem dumb to strip hydrogen off gasoline, but
that's the way NASA did it when they experimented with a hydrogen-fueled
airplane.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]