uh... okay, and state legislatures haven't imposed solar requirements on new construction and 'housing efficiency' mandates.

To think a project like this doesn't influence policy and public opinion is naive and beyond stupid.

Read the "purpose" on their own website?
http://www.solar.ltu.edu/3_purpose.php
Just like a U.N. mandate, one would have to be pretty ignorant to not see the agenda behind statements like,

"It is our team's purpose and mission is to demonstrate to the public how small changes in building and design practices can have a global impact."

Personally, I think a Michigan winter without adequate shelter defines a dangerous environment.

JT,
Perhaps you should post the second sentence of the purpose as well as the first:
By following the principles of reduction, sustainability, and energy conservation, our team will construct and display a solar home that benefits the surrounding environment without sacrificing aesthetics or comfort.

Personally, I would think that 'comfort' would include not freezing during Michigan winters.

Steve

The cost to equip a home for solar power is not really cost effective yet. I just google'd and found a site saying that $20k could buy a decent system for electric generation. Well if my electric bill averages $175 a month, it is going to take a long time to pay for that system assuming that system brings my grid cost of electricity effectively to zero. That looks like 9.5 years. The average length of home ownership is supposedly 7 years in this country. So for the average family installing a system, it would not pay off (unless they move to another solar powered house, which is unlikely).

Perhaps nano-technology applied to solar cells and batteries along with mass production could make this cost effective sometime in the future, but I don't see investing in this at the present time. I suspect that many people doing this now do it are treating it like a "green" status symbol as opposed to being practical.

I do recall that there is some place in Germany where politics insists on solar panels. So there is some danger in having government mandate this stuff.

I'm really not making fun of those Engineering Students just because they ride the short bus.
I just don't them endangering anybody by doing maintenance on the short bus.

You really should pick on the City of Troy - they were the ones doing the maintenance. But why let facts get in the way of a perfectly good tantrum, right?:LOL::rolleyes:

...

I did record, and watch, a one hour documentary Solar Decathlon on the on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. It was actually pretty good.

Some of the requirements were pretty high pressure in that the students had to transport and set up within a week (I think) and judges listened to their spiel and observed if the built-from-scratch systems really worked as intended. The portability of the homes severely restricted wide open practical design.

Germany’s Technische Universitat Darmstadt won the competition, followed by the University of Maryland and Santa Clara University in California.

The current damage to floors was listed as about $16k on one site I saw.

Wonder how we Cobra guys would do if we had to design and build a high performance replica on a D.C. lawn in a week. One that didn't use any gas. We might get our butt kicked by some Germans building a BMW Z4 replica.

Hey! Just thought of something. I'm half German.

But quarter Bohemian. Didn't they build Yugo's or something?

Wes

...

Wes,
They built them at their own universities, transported them, and the reassembled them. This particular one had almost $400K in transportation and related costs (people have been lumping that all in together with the actual cost of the house).

The scoring was actually really complicated - they took measurements and assigned point values for staying within certain temperature ranges at various points during the day. They also had to cook meals for 3 different judging teams, showers were used and water pressure and temp had to be maintained, along with a bunch of other things. I suspect that some of our houses would not pass the tests that these solar ones had to go through.

Steve

Steve,

A question, not an argument. What states would those solar powered houses really work well in year round? A few years ago P.G.& E. tried to get everyone here to go to solar power with some help from them and abandoned it after about 6 months as our weather just isn't practical for solar power, except in the Summer. About 5 to 6 months a year, there would be no power, during a normal year which we haven't had for several years. Some of the solar panels were damaged by hail, and the batteries couldn't store enough to last two days of rain or darkness. I am sure the batteries have been improved by now but even so, it would take a huge amount of capacity to run a small house completely for even a day, and the batteries do have to be replaced just as the ones in the ESS machines do. I believe they finally figured that for a 900 square foot house to just break even up here it would take around 90 years. Not exactly sure of those figures as it was a few years ago but I was following it with interest as I wanted to see if it would be practical to even go to partial solar.

Ron

Ron,
I look into getting solar every 2-3 years or so. I am at the point where I could run about 2/3 of my average use from solar panels, and they would pay for themselves in about 10 years. (though my electric rates have increased and I have not recalculated for that). My state has pretty high electricity rates, and they also have a lot of incentives to add alternate energy sources. My house is also facing the perfect direction for maximum panel sun time. The panels have also significantly increased their efficiency/cost ratio since I first started looking.

It really depends on what kind of setup you want to get. You don't have to get batteries, but then you need a backup source for nights and rainy days. You also know what ESS battery packs are like - I cannot imagine too many homeowners wanting even a small pack in their house. I can sell the excess back to the electric company if I do not want to go the battery route. Having a fully standalone system (one that can run when the electric company has problems or downed lines) is a lot more complicated and expensive than just having solar as an additional source.

I don't know where the 'perfect' location would be. I think that depends on electricity rates, tax credits, weather, and a lot of other factors. Maybe Southern CA?

It is not a perfect technology, and certainly not going to save the planet or get us off of foreign oil, but it is still worth developing and using when and where it makes sense to.

Steve

The local Indian tribe here has just built thier first house with solar panels. The design from the get-go was not to run completely on solar energy, but the solar panels would work in conjunction with the outside electrical source....

The electrical systems in the house are designed to run on the standard electrical supply and whenever possible it will automatically switch to the solar panels when they can supply the electricity for the currnet demand....I can see this working with a standard electrical supply to help lower energy use/cost, the question is,is it feasable right now???? I'm sure with technology always changing, there will be a time when solar panels will be able to assist standard electrical supplies at a reasonble cost making it a worthwhile deal.

They estimate it will reduce the normal energy cost by about 25%... No figures were given on the cost of the solar panels and related electrical components as most of this was done thru a goverment grant type deal.....

It's kinda a "test home" right now....but it does show promise....

David

Steve & David,

At the rate our electric and all utilities are going up anything would help, but at this time I don't think solar panels are a viable option for here. I live just in the foothills of the mountains and we have thunderstorms, hail, snow, and rain during about 4 to 6 months of a normal year. The past 3 years have not been normal at all. I looked at a couple of new big office buildings they built in Redding about 4 years ago and they have solar panels on the roof that are supposed to just help run them. Then when I talked to a couple of the people who worked in the buildings they told me they were having a lot of problems with the panels breaking and not producing enough electricity to ever pay for what they cost. I am sure that in the past 4 years they have improved on the panels, but I don't have a roof as big as the two solar panels they used on those buildings. I would like to find something that would help with my electric bill, but even the two solar companies that I have talked to here told me that it was not economically practical for me to have them installed even just to help some.

Ron

Ron,
I think some places are just not meant for solar power (though some of the Al Gore crowd think solar panels are great everywhere). Sounds like a wind turbine would be perfect, though. I have no idea what kind of juice they generate, or what the cost is, so it may be not be that great an idea.

Steve

I remember reading an article a while back about some experimental solar electricity that used nano-tubes and plastic. The researchers thought they would eventually be able to use something like an ink-jet printer to create the solar cells on a flexible plastic material. It would cost a small fraction of what the current technology is. It sounded promising, but was still years from getting out of the lab.

Steve,
I have to agree that the testing was inordinately intricate although I was likely half asleep when I watched it. I think in cases like this, the projects are "built to failure". We could all agree more is learned if all of us understand the engineering concept.

The program was somewhat humorous and heartbreaking in the Murphy's Law dept. Like I say, it reminds me of some of the Cobra-build snafu's. I took Fred's humorous comments to reflect this while he teased you. In effect we are all window-lickers. :LOL:

Ron,

I suspect hail damage could be mitigated by the old Alaska Highway technique (now paved). The old graveled AH had so many thrown rocks, it was recommended that the windshield and headlights be shielded by a metal screen to save breaking. Perhaps 3/8 inch mesh. There is some associated "shade" loss.

The Chinese will probably soon invent a superior solar panel since they are short on resources. Unless they conquer Russia with it's vast reserves, God forbid. First gunpowder then solar, those rascals. I think solar is, at best about 20% efficient now. Some think we will see 80% in the near future.

One of the reasons I haven't had as much time to post here was we bought a camper last year. So I did do some internet research into RV ownership questions I had. In that course, I ran into essays on solar and wind power for primitive camping (I'm a info-junky sucker for getting sidetracked). Solar is also partly popular for camping when it is in a populated site because it is much quieter than noisy gas or even wind generators. Solar already works extremely well when minimal power is needed by conserving it, using LED lighting etc. Refrigeration can be adequately done with solid state (also known as thermoelectric). A.C.? Forget it. Maybe next year.

Wes

...

Right here in this area, wind power would be iffy at best. We don't have much wind normally as the mountains block most of it. I am talking to a friend of mine who a few years ago sold his world wide electronics company and started a solar company. He lives in the Bay Area and has been up here a lot of times and he said with what they have to offer now he thinks I would save money by paying the higher rates as it takes so many panels to generate enough electricity to be practical for most homes in an area like this.
I have visited the wind farms down toward Livermore and talked to the techs there and they told me there was a lot of upkeep on those turbines. Of course they are huge and they have steady wind in that area almost all the time.

Ron