offgrid and fuel savings

This topic has 37 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by firebrick43.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 38 total)

1 2 3 →

Author
Posts
February 12, 2008 at 12:07 pm #39460
Rod
Participant
I wonder how many readers are either off grid electricity wise or make a part of their own.
I am also interested in how folks are coping with the high price of fuel for transportation off the farm. Any innovative ideas on either of these two subjects?
February 12, 2008 at 4:03 pm #45715
J-L
Participant
Speaking personally we are still on the ‘grid’. I’ve made some changes in how we operate on our ranch that help save fuel. We move cattle around to various pastures horseback as always. Some of these are 2 to 8 miles from the homeplace. We used to trailer the horses to these pastures just to save time. These last few years we ride to and from all but the furthest place. Doesn’t seem like much, but if you figure 4 or 5 trips per week it does add up to quite a bit throughout the summer.
We’ve also made changes in our haying by puting the teams in the field more and more on our rakes. Also use them spreading manure, which is quite a job with the amount generated by developing 45 head of heifers and bull calves through the winter. From the look of the cost of fertilizer this year (it’s supposed to nearly double) we’ll be glad to have it.
I’ve also built smaller meadow drags (tire drags) to use with my teams. We have to go over several hundred acres of ground breaking up the manure in the spring where we’ve fed cattle in the winter. Mostly I’ll do the acres needing it the most. This year I’ll field 2 teams on them and the tractors will sit in the shed more. Time is always the problem here. So much to get done in the spring!
Well, I’ve gone on long enough. That’s most of what I try to do to burn less fuel. Much of it is done to take the bite out of my fuel bill, but it also makes me feel a little better personally.
February 12, 2008 at 6:49 pm #45714
goodcompanion
Participant
We are plugged into the grid. It seems to me that just getting out the kerosene lamps when the grid is no more makes more sense that a massive investment now for something that’s marginally functional. Most folks that I know who use solar electricity spend a lot of time babysitting their system, especially in winter. The grid is a useful tool for me to build up the operation in the here and now. Later I’ll figure out a way to do without it when the time is right.
As for fuel, it’s only a mile into town. I’m going to try starting to use the team for local errands with the wagon, more to make a point than anything else. But I’ve also sold my heavy truck and am figuring out ways to do most of my farm business with a subaru station wagon.
February 13, 2008 at 3:59 am #45701
Carl Russell
Moderator
We are off grid at our home, using a small solar bank (350 watts), and a 1000 watt wind turbine. Most of our power comes from wind and sun, but we do have to top off the batteries with a gas generator. I wouldn’t call it babysitting really, but I do pay attention to the amp meter. To me it is like harvesting electricity from the sky. However, we have gravity feed water, compact flourescent light bulbs, no energy suckers like coffee makers, and wall switches for all our phantom loads (computers, TV, radio) We also have a Sun Frost insulated 24VDC refrigerator.
My theory has not been to make a huge non-cost-effective investment, but to conserve, and build into a system that can meet our needs. Most systems out there are over-engineered, so that when you want to run the vacuum, you don’t have to check the battery level. The problem with that is, the system is topped off most of the time, so your spilling power, and wasting the cost of investment. The other huge part (nearly 1/2) of the cost is installation. I installed everything, including the tower, and all the electrical requirements. Our cost was half what was quoted to us.
The grid-tied solar and wind systems are really what the engineers love, because conservation doesn’t have to be part of the discussion. The owners always have enough power, unless the power goes out (amazingly many grid-ties are not installed with home power systems), so they never consider cutting corners. But they look GREEN.
Conservation is where it’s at though. I don’t think it matters what your talking about, electricity or fuel, we can do so much with so much less with just a little planning and commitment. I read that a microwave oven (we don’t have one!)is so efficient that it takes less electricity to cook a meal with it, than it takes to have it plugged in all day long. But who wants to shut off the power to the microwave? Then the digital clock will be all messed up! This is a good example of phantom load. People are just so used to using electricity that they don’t realize how much they use to do nothing. Even conventional electric homes could significantly reduce their power consumption if they just did it. Obviously, we have more motivation as our power is finite.
Anyway, my mother’s house is on this property, and we have a couple of freezers there, and the shop and the barn are also grid tied. Like I said building into it.
Fuel for the truck is tough though. Just plowing this winter has been a ridiculous expense. I am going to be spending the better part of the next couple of years doing all of my logging on our property, or within walking distance, for a couple of reasons, but fuel will be a big savings. I also bought a beater Subaru to fix up (Time?) to run errands in etc.
Spending energy right now, man, Gotta Go. Carl
February 26, 2008 at 10:44 pm #45717
Donn Hewes
Keymaster
I have wanted to add to this thread for a while but never had the time. I like to think of our energy use this way. There is what we used before, what we use today is often less as we make changes to infrastructure and methods of farming that need less energy inputs, and there is what we will do in the future as we continue toward what we think a sustainable farm should be. This approach saves me from trying to do it all at once. We use a fair amount of electricity (milk pump, milk coolers, freezers for meat), and over time I believe I can cut it to a third of what it was when we started. This kind of conservation should always be undertaken before other more expensive methods of generating are employed. So far we have added a cheese cave whch has cut the needed refrigeration. This year I will build another cave for blue cheese. We are also starting to experiment with ice. In the future I think we will find a way to use ice to cool our milk.
While our home is not off the grid, we did build it to use very little energy. It is heated with wood but needs very little. No fire for the last couple of days as the sun was out. We heat our hot water with wood in the winter and the sun in the fall, summer, and spring. No back up! We often use an electric tea kettle if we don’t have hot water from the fire.
Hay making is another example of being in the middle of a long process of change. We use to use more tractors. Today I use a gas powered forecart pulled by horses and mules. Five or ten years from now I may be using the sickle bar mower again and making loose hay. I know I will still be changing the system as I go along.
We do have a little problem of gas for driving to town. For the moment We share one vehicle, (plus a motorcycle for fair weather) and that helps us conserve trips a little. I do ride a bicycle to work occasionally, but I must confess it is hard to get excited about a 9 mile ride after farming all day. Here again the future may look very different. Today our idea of selling our farm products locally is the Ithaca Farmers Market that is 30 miles away. Right now it is a great market for us and we sell 90 percent of what we produce there, but someday we may have to sell to our immediate neighbors. We may have to change what we sell to meet their demands. It will be interesting.
March 15, 2008 at 10:28 pm #45700
Gabe Ayers
Keymaster
Well, there is much reward and knowing the every loaded step my horses take is less energy required to do my work. It doesn’t matter if I am logging, plowing, disking, planting, or anything I can do with them it all saves energy.
We are on the grid. contributing to climate change by using coal fired electricity.
My commitment to less energy use started in the early 80’s when I built a passive solar earth sheltered home that is half underground in a little south facing hillside on top of the mountain at 3000 ft. elevation. There should be a law against building any other type of home.
Meanwhile I would love to be off the grid and out of any internal combustion vehicles, but I am a ways from being there yet. Our forestry practices are carbon positive and I think that will come to be understood as more for the public good than anything else we do with our lives and I am happy to share that with this forum.
I’d attach a photo of my burrow but the file is to big.
Keep working your animals.
May 25, 2008 at 1:46 pm #45702
Carl Russell
Moderator
Recently we had a local school class come to interview us about our power system. In preparing for that I calculated our average daily electrical usage. We have a Tri-metric meter that keeps track of several facets of the power system, including total amp-hours used. We average 1625 watt-hours per day. It has been a while since I actually looked at an electric bill, but this is quite a bit less than the typical home, and may give others some context for my assertion about conservation.
Our daughter has been incubating and hatching chicks this year (trying to break ties with the genetic monopolies). Just having the incubator on, with one or two 75 watt light bulbs on 24-7, has doubled our daily electrical use.
We are adding another 350 watts of solar panels this spring. There goes the economic stimulus!! Carl
May 25, 2008 at 2:12 pm #45712
Rod
Participant
For those on GMP (Green Mountain Power) and doing or considering net metering I understand that GMP is proposing a rate change. The new rate would pay $0.06 per KWH over the net metering rate which I think is presently $0.13/KWH. This means net metering customers would buy power at 13 cents and sell it at 19 cents if this goes through. Nice incentive if you are a GMP customer.
July 7, 2008 at 8:51 am #45728
cxb
Participant
runescape gold runescape gold
runescape money buy runescape gold
buy runescape money runescape money runescape gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft Power Leveling Warcraft PowerLeveling buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape items runescape accounts runescape gp dofus kamas buy dofus kamas Guild Wars Gold buy Guild Wars Gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold runescape money runescape power leveling runescape money runescape gold dofus kamas cheap runescape money cheap runescape gold Hellgate Palladium Hellgate London Palladium Hellgate money Tabula Rasa gold tabula rasa money Tabula Rasa Credit Tabula Rasa Credits Hellgate gold Hellgate London gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft PowerLeveling Warcraft Power Leveling World of Warcraft PowerLeveling World of Warcraft Power Leveling runescape power leveling runescape powerleveling eve isk eve online isk eve isk eve online isk
Fiesta Gold Fiesta Silver Tibia Gold
Age of Conan Gold
buy Age of Conan Gold
aoc gold
June 2, 2009 at 3:17 am #45727
Joshua Kingsley
Participant
If I have understood right from some people that work at CVPS ( Central Vermont Public Service) there is a new bill that has passed that would mean that solar energy sold back to the grid in vermont will be worth 30 cents a KWH. That would be an incentive to put in solar for some people I would imagine. CVPS has what they call “cow power” wich is generated using methane from dairy farms in vermont, these farms are currently paid in the 9 cent per KWH range I believe… Just some food for thought.
Josh
June 2, 2009 at 11:31 am #45716
Jean
Participant
We just added solar panels for electricity to the house, we already had some for hot water. They do not require babysitting so far. It is great fun to watch the electric meter go backwards.
As far as saving fuel, the only thing I am doing now is using my horse to spread the manure. We are getting rid of lawn by adding garden space.
June 4, 2009 at 4:14 pm #45733
firebrick43
Participant
While I am a firm believer in reducing one consumption, and modifying habits, throwing money at a problem is not going to relieve pollution.
Some technologies are ok such as solar water heat, wind turbines in windy locations have a payback to if they are well designed/low maintenance, but others such as solar cells are terrible, for your wallet, and for the enviroment.
All of a goods is directly related to the cost of energy.
For example. Solar cells. They take large amounts of glass, silver, and copper, as well as some expensive electronics to connect to the grid or lots of lead, acid, and plastic to have a stand alone system.
The silver takes huge mining equipment to excavate and haul thousands of tons of over burden to make one ounce of silver, then it is leached out with chemicals such as arsenic, and processed, melted down and shipped to the solar cell manufacture who has to melt/cast/roll/cut the metal into a product that they can sell. Every step of the manufacture of silver also takes labor of an individual. Those individuals, especially in the US demand a wage that they can survive on and live comfortably, all which takes energy. So when you buy an hour of labor you are buying really 20 dollars of some sort of “energy” typically coal or natural gas powered.
Then they need energy to melt the sand, to produce glass, need tons of energy to mine/process/manufacture/weld the aluminum frame work, and mine/process/manufacture/weld the copper wire.
The list goes on and on for one product.
So what is the point. Some products are “cleaner” at the source, but many ignore the actually energy and pollution caused in the production or maintenance, then you are not reducing your carbon foot print.
Look at a balance sheet, if you are not saving money by switching you are not saving the enviroment. Solar panels fall in this category, so do hybrid cars. Our government and some utilities have passed some feel good legislation that robs from peter to pay paul, giving “incentives” to produce clean energy.
The honda insights gain in fuel efficiency will never offset the higher purchase cost, maintenance and battery pack replacement cost compared to say a honda fit that is an efficient comparable standard technology car.
The cost of building a treadmill for a team of horses to run a buzz saw falls into this category as well. A good stihl chainsaw of decent size will last for many years with inexpensive maintenance and the small amount of fuel it consumes is trivial. A treadmill of sufficient size to run a buzz saw will take much more materials, maintenance, and cost than the chainsaw, so what are you saving? My experience using a tractor mounted buzzsaw tells me that you wont have much success on running one with a horse power either. Maybe a pitman drive bow saw but not a buzz saw.
June 4, 2009 at 5:31 pm #45703
Carl Russell
Moderator
Firebrick, I agree to a point about the solar panels. The point about the excessive use of resources is spot on, but the cost of implementing a system is a full 50 percent related to installation. Also trying to replace current electrical use with solar is unrealistic, for all the reasons you point out, however using solar as a way to generate a small amount of electricity for a stand alone system to facilitate some of the modern conveniences such as refrigeration, telecommunications, and lighting actually does make good sense, especially if you can install the entire system as I have done, saving huge portion of the cost.
As you point out with the chainsaw, although it requires an energy source that is unsustainable, the use of which is entirely dependent on non-local production and distribution, it still makes the most sense in terms of priority use of petroleum, and the return on the type of work performed. (Although it seems like now that we are burning ethanol, we are probably going to be ruining our chainsaws faster than we would like). To me a little bit of solar electricity to run an extremely energy efficient home is much more satisfactory than buying power from the grid, both in terms of money, and environmental concerns.
Living off grid requires that conservation be the foremost source of energy. Make do, do without, then calculate your electrical needs, and install it yourself. It’s not rocket science.
I think I will be more inclined toward hand saws and axes than toward a treadmill powered buck saw when I can’t get enough gas for the CS.
Carl
June 4, 2009 at 6:12 pm #45734
firebrick43
Participant
Carl, I do have to admit that my assessment of solar energy assumed that the majority of people do not possess the skills(even though some would like to believe they do, which goes for some professional installers) to do the installation of such systems or maintain them after the installation is completed. It also assumes that the general population will not accept the loss of convience that they have become accustomed to.
I have lived at times without modern conveniences and could live that way, however, while I have made great strides to reduce our use and consumption, I have to be a realist and realize that if I can not get my wife to give up all of our modern appliances, such as our air conditioner, and the washing machine, how can I expect the rest of the general public to do so?
Solar does make an excellent choice when sized for small loads as you mentioned and ones dwelling is more than a 1/4 mile from suitable grid power as the cost to run power to a dwelling so far is expensive.
It also can make good financial sense when used to pump water in remote locations where a pumping windmill is not suitable do to low wind velocity.
Sustainability has to do with more than a percent or two of the population, it has to be achievable for the majority of the population.
My thought is we need to stop fear mongering and quit the “not in my back yard” attitudes about nukes, large windfarms, solar hot water, and desert south west solar boilers.
I agree with you on the axe/crosscut saws. I find that a good axe and some after experience/skill I can limb a tree easier and faster than a chainsaw. I still buck with the chainsaw even though I have and use occasionally a crosscut. I simply find it hard to ever imagine that at the rate that we are still discovering oil that the 2 to 3 gallons a fuel needed to fall/buck enough trees to heat a home will not be available in even in my great, great grandkids lives.
June 4, 2009 at 10:25 pm #45729
OldKat
Participant
What I have to say may be anathema to some ears. Fair warning, if you don’t want to hear it … tune out now. I am generally loathe to bring some of these points up because many people, on either side of the debate, have a “my minds made up, don’t try to confuse me with the facts” mentality. Still I do have some degree of expertise in these matters, as this next month I will observe my 28th anniversary in the energy industry; almost all of it in some sort of analytical role. Currently it is in the real time operational analysis of one of the major interstate natural gas pipelines that serves the mid–Atlantic into the NYC area, previously I have been in the same role with the major interstate serving the Northeast corridor; Boston, etc. I have also worked in the commercial-operational area of the marketing arm of one of the major producers of natural gas. In fact it was the largest producer of natural gas in the US at that time. Likewise I had a similar role for the marketing affiliate of one of the largest intrastate pipelines in my home state.
That said I don’t have any problem with people wanting to minimize their dependence on, or free themselves completely of any reliance on fossil fuels. In fact I have those feeling to some degree myself. If I had NO concerns on the environmental front, which is not the case, it would still be an excellent idea to minimize our dependence on petroleum simply because such a large percentage of it comes from a region of the world where the average citizen despises the US. Regardless of the cause of their distain, it is there. Even if they LOVED us dearly, the flow of dollars leaving the country to pay for that product is putting a serious drain on our economy. So why put a loaded pistol in their hands and guide that hand to our collective head? I don’t think anyone on this board or any other would argue that this is faulty logic, so I will move on.
Where I see people jumping the track is in their belief that we are in eminent danger of “running out of (fill in the blank) form of energy”. Sorry, isn’t going to happen any time soon. Does that mean that we should be fat, dumb and happy? In no way am I implying that. We still would have all of the geopolitical risk associated with securing petroleum. There would still be the dollar drain on the economy, there would still be the environmental concerns (oil spills, pollution or whatever that might be), there would still be … you name it. Regardless, the talk of “peak oil” has been interpreted by many, many people to believe that the tanks are almost empty. In its truest sense “peak oil” means that we have passed the peak of our ability to identify, locate and produce easily recoverable oil. That’s all well and good. Does it mean we are about to run dry? Well not exactly. The reason I say this is because if I look back at my own career I can identify a time, early on in my working life, that the conventional wisdom said we had about 7 years of natural gas left to produce and then the wells would “run dry”.
Did this happen? Obviously not. Did we suddenly cut our use of natural gas to make it last? No, in fact we are using MUCH, MUCH more natural gas than we used 28 years ago. Billions of cubic feet, or dekatherms as we now term it, per DAY more. Recently I sat in a conference in Plainsboro, NJ where multiple presenters used the figure of 70 to 80 years worth of “conventional” production AND 100 PLUS years of shale gas left at today’s rate of use. What changed? In a word … technology. We are producing natural gas now in areas that 12 to 15 years ago we couldn’t even consider producing. When I worked for Chevron in the early 1990’s I saw maps of potential oil and gas producing regions in the Gulf of Mexico that were not possible to produce with the technology of that day. Today those same regions are producing oil and gas. Shale gas was virtually untapped 15 years ago. Today pipelines are being built to deliver this very gas into the commercial market streams.
Am I saying this will last forever? No. Is there a need to panic? Again, no. Does it make sense to use the resources we have to bridge us to another form of energy? I think so. Still, many people will tell you that we are on the verge of societal collapse based on the absence of energy. IF that happens it will be because of the actions of terrorists or a bumbling government (ours or others), maybe both or even due to other reasons we can’t even envision at this time. It WILL NOT be because the energy industry can’t deliver … because it can.
There was a really good posting on this site recently from the CEO of a natural gas producing and marketing firm as he addressed the graduating class of a high school or a college, I forget which. I don’t know the guy; don’t know his company other than by name. Regardless, his comments reflect and mirror my experiences in this industry. If you haven’t read it you should.
Author
Posts