Submitted by RE Engineer

A renewable energy (RE) policy begins as informed decisions made from case studies of operational renewable energy systems under conditions as close to the expected operating conditions as possible. Carrying out tests and amassing empirical data is imperative. This data would effectively answer the myriad of questions that would need to be answered in the developmental stages of a RE policy.

Some say solar photovoltaic (PV) energy is perfect for us but what type?

Grid-tied or battery based?

What kind of legislation is possible for grid-tied?

What kind of solar-electric collectors will be used?

Mono-crystalline, polycrystalline, amorphous, thin-film?

What kinds of temperatures do these types of panels reach under our sun?

Can they be incorporated with water cooled (water heating) systems to increase cell efficiency and recover thermal energy?

How long would these systems be expected to last?

What about concentrated PV systems?

What kind of efficiency to cost benefits can we expect?

How about wind power especially in the eastern and less densely populated sections of the island? How about power tower?

Maybe these towers can be installed on roofs of large commercial buildings for efficient land use. Stirling-engine-parabolic-dish solar thermal electric systems?

What about wave power especially on the eastern coast?

All of these may be viable but there has been so little research on them that we can’t really determine which are better. We have the tendency of following North American technological models; so officials may be waiting for the holy-grail of renewable energy (RE) to save us. This is possible, but improbable, in the near future at least, so we need to start looking for our own most adequate technologies and the interesting thing is that we have the expertise to start that search.

Our engineers and technicians can be used to design and install different government funded RE projects around the island. These projects can be done in institutions, as scientific (innovation) competitions or on an independent basis. Each installation would have to be well monitored and have excellent data acquisition, record keeping and maintenance all of which seem to be significantly more difficult than the building and design process (especially at the governmental level). These installations could be used as features of school field trips and projects, where secondary and primary school students can learn about RE and energy efficiency.

Just as many learn about information technology, the sensible use and conservation of energy and water would also be an important part of their curriculum. Inculcating better understanding and habits plus creative thinking, effectively combating the social issues related to energy use and conservation.

Step 2: technical and economic evaluations of project results and the narrowing down of technologies to 2 or 3 best options for large scale implementation. This is where the BL&P comes in because their expertise in operation and maintenance of large scale power generation plants along with their ample staff of technicians which would be needed to make sure that projects (on a larger scale) are successful. It must be noted that the BL&P is not obligated to search for our energy solution those decisions are up to the government. They just need to make sure that there is enough capacity to satisfy the island’s needs. And most of their RE research efforts were probably general PR strategies to placate concerns about rising oil prices. The truth of the matter is that most RE technologies for electricity generation make little economical sense and are generally not seen as worth the risk without government backing and subsidies.

Step 3: an individual energy policy for the best small scale possibilities of the pilot projects, giving incentives to consumers who would like to invest in the production of their own electricity or the reduction of their energy footprint. A good mixture of conventional and ‘new’ energy on large and small scales are needed for a sustainable energy mix and for energy security. It is unlikely that a singular technology will be satisfactory for across the board implementation; the most likely situation would be different technologies for different applications to reduce conversions which enforce thermodynamic limitations on efficiency. For businesses or industries that require large amounts of heat, solar thermal or biomass/biofuels might be the most adequate technologies. For those whose energy use is attributed mainly to air conditioning and lighting then solar-hybrid air conditioners and solar-hybrid lighting maybe the answer. If energy needs are very diverse then solar or wind electric systems would be used to cover as much of the energy needs as economically feasible.

Consumers should not expect a reduction in energy cost at any point in time no matter what policies are implemented. Energy efficiency should be a priority in terms of new equipment and appliances, vehicles and especially in the building sector where bioclimatic architecture, energy auditing and intelligent energy control systems should take centre stage. The days of cheap energy are over and we must accept that. Whatever new developments in the energy sector that are made will cost money and energy and as demand increases, RE should only be seen as a way of mitigating the effects for the sake of energy security and the environment but not as a way to reduce energy prices.

Another aspect policy makers have to keep in mind is that energy policies are not limited to devices that generate electricity but those that use them in every facet of society such as telecommunications where wireless systems can save money and energy, in transportation where more efficient public service vehicles and more reliable service can save on fuel and not to mention foreign exchange, in the tourism sector where energy efficiency in hotels and tourist attractions should be a priority and green energy should be part of our tourism product, and extremely important and often forgotten the conservation and sensible use of water.

Related Links

45 responses to “Search Is On For Relevant Renewable Alternative Energy Strategy For Barbados”


  1. We want to officially welcome RE Engineer to the BU family. We found his submission to be thought provoking. Two questions for him:

    1) Does he see a role for the University of the West Indies in the search for a relevant alternative energy strategy?

    2)Given the known conflict of interest which the BL&P has i.e. create wealth for shareholders which can only be optimally done on a fossil fuel model, how can we coop their unswerving support in the search for the best alternative energy solution?


  2. @RE Engineer… Welcome again. I hope you stick around for quite some time…

    IMHO, your above is perfect for where we find ourselves. (Lat.,Long.,Alt.,Time.)


  3. You mention wind power esp. in the less densely populated eastern part of the island, but as this area is supposed to be designated as a national park area under very strict codes for building and developement wouldn’t wind turbines be anti this policy. Also the area is very prone to land slippage.


  4. @David

    Yes UWI has a significant role in energy policy, the more thinkers we have on the subject the better. Renewable energy electives geared towards students of electronics, physics and economics would be a good start. UWI also constitutes an excellent location for pilot projects of small-scale solar and wind, both grid tied and stand alone systems. It is a great place for data acquisition equipment since it has adequate security and good wireless interconnectivity where systems data can be accessed remotely via the internet. Energy systems could also be exploited under real life conditions (day and night) by students who live on hall. These projects can also serve as an example for other campuses. They would also provide the opportunity to carry out final projects on different components or the systems as a whole. With UWI planning on expanding its student housing that could be an excellent opportunity to explore the possibilities of building integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) technologies with thin-film solar roof tiles etc.

    For any plan to work with a company like the BL&P one must make sure that for large-scale projects equipment is in a central location to minimize labour costs, and any extra training that would be required for technicians, engineers and other technical staff is provided by a mutual agreement with government. In terms of consumer financed systems there must be legislation in place that guarantees the power that will be generated by the system to ensure that there is no duplicate generation capacity. Where RE systems can effectively shave peak loads saving on equipment costs. It must be ensured in whatever plan that fuel savings are sufficient to significantly reduce operating costs. Payback time, foreign exchange savings and local training are all aspects that have to be taken into consideration and ironed out before BL&P would be officially ready to jump on the RE bandwagon. Right now the only really viable large-scale solution I see is offshore wind-farming, though more expensive and less mature than onshore it is the only technology that would currently be economically competitive with fossil fuel fired plants, be able to insert appreciable amounts electrical energy into the grid and solve the land use and not in my backyard (NIMBY) issues.

    @ Kay

    When I mentioned wind turbines in the less densely populated eastern section of the island I was not talking about large scale rather about on the small scale with 1 to 3kW turbines that would produce energy for a standard household. These would be far more economical (provided adequate maintenance is carried out) than present-day solar photovoltaic modules and with the wider spacing of houses etc, the erection of 10 and 15 m towers should not be a problem. A good foundation would also minimize any land slippage problems. As for the national park area I still do not see how wind turbines would affect this policy. The term windpark was actually coined in countries like Denmark and Germany where turbines are actually part of recreational parks. I see no reason why that cannot occur here. Contrary to popular belief wind turbines are amazingly striking (one has to see it to believe it) not to mention functional.


  5. Renewable wind energy
    Im with Kay on the wind development on the east coast. I have an idea……I should trademark it now but I love barbados so ill just let you have it.
    Guesss what? We already have 1/2 the infrustructure in place for wind power! Historically Barbados was an island characterized by sails including those found on the hundreds of windmills on the island. These windmills are part of our cultural heritage and many still stand yet others lie in disrepair. many of these mills were located in windy places across the island in order to take advantage.

    Location, location, location

    wind turbines are expensive and destructive to bird populations. What we need to do is rehabilitate the historic mills to functioning windmills again and connect them to the power grid! What a brilliant idea and it has been there for hundreds of years!

    youll thank me later
    Lani Edghill
    Master of Urban and Regional Planning
    Portland State University


  6. @ Lani Edghill

    I understand your concerns and respect your views on the topic but I am forced to point out that like you I am all in favour of restoring our historical windmills etc. But I cannot see how wind turbines would affect this restoration. No historical windmill would have to be destroyed to erect a wind turbine. Secondly more birds are killed by cars and other vehicles than generally killed by modern wind turbines (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/04/common_misconce.php), yes wind turbines are expensive but so would the renovation, proprietary parts and infrastructure that would be needed to make ancient windmills capable of producing electricity. There would also be technical limitations, windmills were designed to pump water and crush grain so they would generally be relatively low to the ground, having many small rotors to increase torque. The amount of energy that can be harnessed from a wind turbine is proportional to the capture area (diameter of rotors) and the height above ground level, so there would be serious technical limitations to the amount of electricity that could be produced. Ironically since these windmills would be rotating at a much higher speed than modern wind turbines they would have a significantly greater chance of killing birds than any well designed modern turbine.


  7. @RE Engineer

    We question the commitment of the UWI if only they were given a body of knowledge to work with by Professor Oliver Headley and they have done nothing that is public to move the matter of the search for alternative energy sources along.


  8. Professor Headley had the foresight to recommend new ways of energy production which would suit our peculiar needs, resources and budget.

    Although I welcome RE’s entry into this thread, I cannot endorse his/her same old, same old committee led, small scale trials.

    It will not address the problem which will hit Barbados like a runaway train in the very near future.

    UWI’s intellectuals have had the years of opportunity since Prof. Headley’s period of influence , and what have we heard from the hill……zilch.

    The time for their precious talk and working committees is now well past, they have missed the train, and Bajans have to take the responsibilty for energy sustainability into their own hands.

    Intellectuals and politicians will not pay our Fuel surcharge, whilst ever we are shackled to the profit driven BL&P.

    BL&P will never alter their business model whilst ever we accept this fuel surcharge why should they?

    They are a private monopoly milking a compliant nation.

    Until the GoB get forceful enough with this monopoly and say sort your restrictive practices out and help us deal with Barbados’ energy production in the most efficient manner possible, we are going to be continuously fleeced by them and the FTC, until oil goes above $500 a barrel.

    What then?

    Riots on the streets?

    Liberate energy production now and restrict BL&P to their primary function i.e. distribution

    If they are unwilling to introduce net metering, cancel their monopoly, there are a thousand companies worldwide who will step in.

    URGENT action is needed now, not long talk.

  9. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    You know… Straight talk, you never cease to amaze me. This graduate engineer has brought his recently acquired knowledge and training to bear on the situation by putting forward a well reasoned and rational approach to addressing our energy challenges, and you resurface… now with a “$500 per barrel oil / riots in the streets” rant, and a net metering recommendation that, while worthwhile, is likely to have very little impact in the short to medium term.
    Running around frantically, shouting for urgent action without careful planning and charting a path to improved energy security at an affordable price (what you so graciously refer to as long-talk) is a recipe for disaster.
    RE’s recommendations are sound (with the exception of off-shore wind, which was ruled out in an earlier thread, until deep water technologies are commercialized).
    A panic reaction is unnecessary and ill-advised.
    What we need is an approach similar to that recommended by RE, perhaps coupled with the roll out of a transition technology like natural gas which BL&P has suggested is available in sufficient volumes from T&T to make a meaningful impact on both energy prices and security in the short to medium term.
    You need to calm down with this peak-oil hysteria. My prescription for you is two Prozacs, a couple Kadooment fetes this weekend and finally bumper patrol with Stabby de Guard on Monday. Then come back fresh and re-energized next Tuesday to do some real problem solving.


  10. @ Straight Talk

    Without government subsidies (please note conventional power generation is subsidized), renewable energy generation is less than competitive except in the case of wind and hydropower. Since there are no rivers in Barbados hydro is not even an option, as for wind on the small scale everyone in Barbados does not have 50 to 200 meters between their house and the next so erecting the towers needed to harness wind energy is not an option for many, but by all means I hope that those who have this option and the financial capacity (US$4500 per kW – average household would require a 1 – 3kW turbine) to do so will do so. I would personally assist in the system design. However the main type of RE system that is possible for most Barbadian is solar photovoltaic which would cost between US$8000 – 12000 per kW(going on actual figures for monocrystalline modules http://www.solarbuzz.com ). With a panel life of 20 years and not including financing, maintenance and equipment replacement costs the overall cost of solar produced electricity would still be about BBD50 – 80 cents/kWh, we currently pay about BBD23 – 29 cents/kWh. So by all means persons can take energy generation into their own hands but unless they have space for a wind turbine they would be losing out. Another thing is that I cannot comprehend the despise of BL&P they are a business like any other that bring in profits like any other, and to me C&W which is still so well tolerated (even through their blatant disregard for interconnectivity regulations) is much worse. At least BL&P has great service, 100% coverage and outages are comparatively infrequent. Plus Barbados has some of the lowest electricity prices in the Caribbean. Sure the government can ‘cancel BL&P’s monopoly’ but a power plant is not built in a day or even a year. In addition I wonder where it would be built since all the prime spots have been claimed by BL&P, Arawak and the airport. I am all for energy liberation but is everyone willing and ready for the consequences. If your solar panels are damaged, an inverter blows out or the blade of your wind turbine cracks from fatigue, there will be no BL&P to call and send out a truck at 2 am and without proper support mechanisms we would all spend quite a bit of time in the dark. Literally!


  11. Morning all.

    I do find it interesting that once again we find ourselves back talking about electrical generation, as if it’s the only form of energy we consume…

    What about all the options for electrical consumption reduction or elimination? Specifically, lighting and refrigeration?

    @RE Engineer — I would welcome your opinion on such available technologies and the costing of same. From what I have researched, the economic curves on these have already crossed…


  12. If I may… A metaphor which be useful for this discussion…

    Electricity is like a drill. Nobody actually wants a drill; what they want are holes…

    So what about finding ways of making holes, without using a drill?

    For the average human, electricity is rarely consumed directly. Direct consumption tends to be avoided, in fact.

    Electricity is a handy energy transport. But it’s not actually what we want.

  13. Keith Headley Avatar

    RE Engineer.

    Contact NREL. Every single type of system you mention at the beginning has been tested by engineers for over ten years. We are past this.

    Over and out.


  14. A point which RE Engineer raises explicitly above is the need for extensive *empirical* data acquisition and analysis.

    I want to support this argument 100%. This is a *critical* component to project successes.

    Thank you REE for bringing this forward. I sometimes forget not everyone works with datasets with hundreds of millions of records every day….

  15. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    Keith,

    Yes the systems have been tested, but in specific environments and under certain conditions. So, for example, we all know that utility scale wind farms are technically viable, but a careful study must be undertaken at potential sites to determine commercial viability. For most renewable technologies, feasibility is site specific. This is what RE was alluding to.

    Chris,

    Drills are just so convenient and relatively inexpensive… IMHO the electricity substitution option with the greatest potential is absorption cooling (powered by solar or natural gas when that becomes available), but the cost/inconvenience factor and space requirements still leave electricity with the cooling edge in most (particularly residential) applications.


  16. Sources close to BU suggests that the Caribbean Development Bank has always been prepared to worked with its members to pursue the kind of site specific development work which is a prerequisite to rolling out a project of this nature.


  17. @MME… Haha. (smile) Yes, drills are *very* convenient; and we’ll never be rid of them. But they *are* getting more expensive. Also, sometimes there’s simply better ways of making holes…

    I agree with you completely that “absorptive cooling” is the most likely immediate opportunity. I actually raised this some time ago here on BU.

    But I would like to take some exception to your comment “when that becomes available”. Absorptive cooling solutions are available on a *commercial* basis now.

    Just Google for “lithium bromide cooling” (183,000 pages) or “absorptive cooling” (132,000 pages) to begin doing the Due Diligence and Market Research.

    My research on the subject (starting years ago) suggested that this technology is being developed heavily, particularly in China.

    And just to be explicit — when I use the word “consumer”, I use it to mean anyone acting as a purchaser in a marketplace. It is not meant to suggest that a consumer is necessarily an individual (although it doesn’t exclude it).

    Personally, I feel that the early adapters of alternative energy solutions are most likely to be medium to large scale enterprise. Hotels, factories, warehouses, business complexes, et al.

    The individual consumer is probably best advised to wait for another few years before deploying kit. Although this *doesn’t* mean that everyone shouldn’t begin deploying energy *saving* devices and methodologies immediately.


  18. @REE… A thought just hit me… Have you approached BICO, offering your consulting services?

    I read on a dead tree a few weeks ago that because of high energy costs, BICO were looking at deploying energy saving technology (more insulation — who would have thought?) and possibly alternative energy refrigeration.

    Please get in there, and don’t let someone sell them some stupidly inefficient and expensive PV powered traditional compressor driven cooling system….


  19. I would certainly love to have a meeting with re engineer for some guidance on the UWI role.


  20. maybe david can arrange for me to get my contact details to re engineer.


  21. According to the Midweek Nation, Wednesday, July 30, 2008 issue, on page 29 A, in an article entitled: Govt to launch energy-saving plan shortly, this already doting DLP Government seems set to launch “a reasonably exciting six-month $ 500 000 energy conservation programme right after the Crop-Over Festival.”

    Furthermore, in this same article, the Prime Minister of Barbados said the initiative was being introduced at a time when the cost of petroleum products was spiralling and the burgeoning demand for the products had dramatically increased over the years.

    This article goes on to state that Mr. Thompson – in announcing this program in the House of Assembly on Tuesday – revealed that the ultimate objective of the first three months of the national public persuasion programme would be to reduce energy bills in your home, vehicles and businesses, look at ways of resorting to renewable energy, etc. and that throughout the course of the programme – which would be run from just after Crop-Over to March 31, 2009, the Government will be making use of advertisements and public announcements to get that message across ( at this point we are really confused about what the Nation is really saying), slogans, a logo, jingles and the creation of a voice or persona for this public persuasion programme, the introduction of energy competitions for schools, a science exhibition on renewable energy and energy conservation, town hall meetings for the public, and the works. However, what we must say now about the starting and ending times of the different phases of this program, according to this said news article, is that we were left in a state of total confusion, mathematically, as to whether or not this is really a six-month programme, as the Nation so reports it to be.

    Anyhow, with regard to this so-called six-months energy conservation, we in PDC must make it unequivocally clear to the people of Barbados that we ARE and WILL NOT be supporting this programme, for at least four major reasons:

    1) This programme is going to be an absolute waste of money, time, energy and resources of the people of this country, esp. from the point of view that the country’s sole electricity service provider, which ought NOT to be at this stage – BL&P – and so many other entities and persons in Barbados have already been doing a fairly good job in regard of almost ALL of the things this increasingly failing DLP Government is saying it will be doing in the context of this unnecessary energy-wasting so-called six-months program. So, why this essentially repetitious money-squandering exercise at a time of political, economic financial recession in Barbados? Why?;

    2) This DLP Government has NO, NO authority – moral, legal or otherwise whatsoever – to be telling people, businesses and other entities in Barbados about energy conservation, when it is this same damn DLP Government that – in April of this year – so ruthlessly and shockingly increased the cost of gasoline, kerosene, diesel, and LPG, on the backs of esp. the masses and middle classes of people of this country and on the backs of those others who – including many other businesses and entities – are altogether at this stage reeling from the higher cost of living and doing business effects of those foolish decisions;

    3) What the country needs right now is a national strategy that will speak to the an entire reduction in the cost of living and the cost of doing business of this country – some things which this DLP Government has promised to do, but for which it will a damn failing grade for non-accomplishment of these promises. Nevertheless, this strategy is WHAT the country needs, NOT “any drop in the bucket” belittling effort that will certainly NOT feature in any mission to really reduce ENERGY BILLS IN THE HOMES, VEHICLES AND BUSINESSES OR IN ACTUALLY LEADING TO PEOPLE AND OTHER ENTITIES RESORTING TO USING RENEWABLE ENERGY IN THE COUNTRY;

    4) The focus of this joke program seems to be ill placed – on energy conservation. This ought NOT to be so, since it is the astronomical cost of the use of energy in the country that is the great problem. Yet, because this Government benefits by way of TAXATION esp. from staggeringly high fuel costs in the country, this may be why the Government’s focus re this joke programme is NOT on reducing the COSTS of energy, but on producing frivilous mind-distorting public relations gimmicks just like how the last BLP use to do, rather than getting to the heart of the problem – REDUCING THE ASTRONOMICAL OVERALL COST OF THE USE OF/ ENERGY IN BARBADOS, ESP. AT A TIME WHEN THE COUNTRY MUST USE GREATER AMOUNTS OF ENERGY, IF IT WANTS TO BECOME A WORLD CLASS SOCIETY.

    Finally, with regard to the matter of the production and implementation a national strategy for reducing the cost of living and doing business in this country, we in PDC shall restate for the benefit of the blogging public and others that a future PDC Government shall do many fundamental things to realize such worthy objectives, et al;

    1) The Abolition of Taxation;

    2) The Abolition of Interest Rates;

    3) The Abolition of Exchange Rates Parities with the Barbados Dollar:

    4) The Abolition of Motor Vehicle Insurance;

    5) Making Institution Loans for Productive Purposes Non-Repayable;

    6) Making Imports of Goods and Services (including Fuel and Fuel-related imports) into the country Zero-“priced” at all points of entry; and

    7) Making sure that Exports of Goods and Services from Barbados are paid for in local currency/”prices’.

    PDC


  22. Does anyone else hear that? An annoying background buzz??? Oh, sorry (“*slap*”), it was just a mosquito in my office…

    REE et al: Please note:

    http://www.nationnews.com/life/302866074625862.php
    http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/NewViewNewsleft.cfm?Record=36262
    http://www.barbadosadvocate.com/NewViewNewsleft.cfm?Record=36265

    I presume and assume that you’ve already made contact with the relevant players.

    (Of course, to “assume makes an “ass” out of “u” and “me”…)

  23. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    Chris,

    My comment “when that becomes available” was in reference to imported natural gas, not absorption cooling.


  24. @MME… My apologies. I realized that’s what you must have meant afterwards…


  25. @JR

    We will see what we can do.


  26. @Keith Headley

    As Chris Halsall and Micro Mock Engineer have both explained what I meant in terms of testing I will just leave two examples for further understanding. I am quite aware of NREL and the excellent work they have done especially in terms of PV module testing. In my post I mentioned 3 types of silicon based modules, monocrystalline, polycrystalline and amorphous. Everyone is in agreement that monocrystalline is the most efficient and longest lasting under most conditions so for most places it would seem the best option. However they are the most energy intensive to produce so are the most expensive. But here is an important fact, the efficiency of monocrystalline modules actually decreases with increasing operation temperatures, so on very hot days in hot climates they maybe less efficient than their textbook efficiencies, there are equations for this correction but better testing under our conditions would be a great indicator as to what to expect. Furthermore amorphous modules are the least durable of the bunch, but are the least costly silicon based solar PV modules, and they actual experience an increase in their efficiency under hot conditions. I am unable to give you a ballpark figure on how much they would produce here and I don’t think anyone can, not even NREL without testing it here on a year round basis. How long will they last compared to their monocrystalline cousins? Another question I cannot answer. Some research says 5 years some say as long as 18 years but that depends on the degradation from solar exposure. Barbados has about 10 to 11 hours of sunshine on a year round basis, more northerly places vary between 8 and 14 hours and that could make a large difference over years. Now to windpower, wind patterns are extremely different everywhere, even on an island as small as Barbados they are differences throughout the island depending on topography, etc, for windfarm planning one must collect a recommended 10 years of wind data in the area at the height of the planned turbines and construct what is called a Weibull distribution to estimate the amount of electricity that one would expect to be generated. I personally assisted with this for the windfarm proposal at Lamberts, and that is where the figure that the 10MW rated farm would only produce an average of 2MW. Yes consultants had been brought in and their figures were approximately the same. But no one could be totally sure since Barbados has no long term wind energy production data, and so many other factors would have to be taken into consideration. So it is no shock that BL&P and financial institutions are not in any hurry to spend $24 million plus on the project even though all through Europe and the US are some very successful projects. If anyone could go up and say I have a turbine that was working for 2 years it has such and such a capacity and under the 8.8 m/s average here in St. Lucy it produced such and such MWh or GWh of clean electricity, I am sure there would be much more confidence.


  27. @Chris Halsall

    As I said in the primary post, each technology has its purpose be it in terms of generating heat, refrigeration or electricity and the technology used should be for the direct offset of whatever form of energy is used. Be it for solar thermal for steam and hot water production in factories, solar-thermal air conditioning and solar fiber-optic lighting in commercial buildings, or solar-electric and thermal for individual houses. As with the case of most RE technologies and especially solar these technologies are rather expensive and are mostly still in the experimental or immature stages (for absorption chillers equipment costs about US$1000-$1500/ton of refrigeration while standard equipment would cost about US$450-$600/ton but one would expect a 20 to 50% reduction electricity used for refrigeration or air-conditioning with the solar option. Solar absorption and adsorption refrigeration and air conditioning are rather expensive technologies, but they have been proven to work and are worth researching and testing, the only thing is that maintenance can be a killer. Actually my thesis was on solar liquid desiccant air conditioning for the Caribbean, which I believe is a great alternative to absorption air condition with more simple components and better chance of manufacture right here at home which a definite plus in the context of sustainability. From my calculations the system would cost about 8 to 10 times the cost of a regular AC system but savings of 30 to 65% on electricity costs could be expected. Another topic that needs to be touched is the relative ease of manufacture of RE system components, like parabolic trough and dish collectors, stirling engines and other such equipment that can be used for hot water, steam and electricity generation. I have also been researching GPS and internet tracking possibilities for solar concentrating technologies which could significantly reduce their construction and maintenance costs. There are so many things that I feel overwhelmed sometimes. That is why there needs to be more brains working on these matters.

    By the way I totally agree with the fact that the early adopters of RE solutions would be more on the medium to large scale, the economics would definitely work much better in there favour, especially for non-electricity producing solutions. I will make contact with BICO thanks for the heads up. Additionally I will be trying to make contact with some officials from the Ministry of Energy and Environment.

    I also have a question. I keep hearing that BL&P is the island’s sole electricity provider and this should not be so, but hasn’t it been a while since the market has freed and they only have distribution rights. So is it not possible that should any other company care to challenge them they would have the all clear?


  28. I admire your enthusiasm REE, and I hope you never lose it. I’ll try to answer everything you said, one point at a time.

    You said “better testing under our conditions would be a great indicator as to what to expect.”

    Very true.

    After much research, where everyone was at a much higher level than me, so I consider myself a minor participant in the research phase, single crystal silicon was put up by the Solar Project in several areas in Barbados.

    All of these were manufactured by BP Solar, which is still considered to be the best manufacturer of single crystal silicon.

    When I visited NREL in the nineties they had been testing amorphous panels from EVERY manufacturer at the time for in many cases ( obviously some has only recently come out) for five years or more, 365 days a year 24 hours a day. The longest lasting was 7 and a half years and the shortest was 3 and a half years.

    Based on their recommendation and our own review of the data it was seen that single crystal silicon was better in both the short and long term, in spite of the increased costs.

    The regression analysis and other data is supposed to be at UWI. I doubt you will be able to get any of it now unfortunately.

    You could contact others who would know more than me about the research phase – Professor Moseley, William Hinds and David Ince.

    This is what we found in practice. The panels give 15 to 20 percent MORE than their rated peak output. You can destroy batteries, even with expensive charge controllers, in Barbados 365 days a year.

    This effect is small on small installations (e.g. two or three panels) and large on large installations (eg Skeete’s Bay in St. John).

    BP solar panels from the agricultural station in Graeme Hall are about 34 years old and are still working.

    From talking to other persons in the field, they have yet to see a BP single crystal panel that wasn’t abused (shading can destroy any panel for example) last less than 28 years.

    You may also know that superhuman efforts were made to keep the wind turbine alive. The problems boiled down to maintenance.

    This is another reason why PV was chosen.

    The Solar Thermal installation at Graeme Hall failed in under seven years – the PV panels were still working when they were taken down and are still working today.

    My father did more research into Solar Thermal than in PV – he in fact was considered an Solar Thermal expert.

    So why did the Solar Project choose PV for the large installations?

    Because after years of experimental data from various sources I can tell you that the only weak point in what we did was the batteries.

    I can’t give you personal experimental data for grid tied systems because that was the next stage.

    I hope you can make a difference. As I have said before, I don’t care who gets the ball rolling for renewable electric power, or who gets the credit, as long as we as a nation DO something.


  29. What are some of the issues involved in running a natural gas powered generator for a home that uses about 450 kwhr/month? Cost of generator, cost of natural gas, is it allowed etc? Is it a good idea?


  30. Thank you very much Mr. Headley, I was unaware about some of the installations you mentioned I would still suggest future experimentation of thin-film technologies especially the new CIGS panels as they show much promise but that is just my personal opinion from following their progress because much has been made since the nineties. Well I would like to get my hands on some of this experimental data but as you said that would be improbable and that is just a pity because it would really assist in the streamlining of further PV installations and working out the kinks with the battery issues that you put forward.


  31. @RE Engineer

    Please email us using your gmail account.


  32. @REE…

    Thank you for the estimates of costing and expected electrical consumption reductions. However, two very important variables you didn’t provide are the expected payback period (let’s model at our current energy costs, and let’s say 50% higher spread over the first three years), and, secondly, the expected live-span of the kit.

    Have the curves crossed? In which year?

    You mentioned your thesis was on “solar liquid desiccant air conditioning”. I would *love* to read that document. Would you be willing to share? I would promise to not distribute. If it’s not online, and you’re willing, please e-mail it to the address that’s on my blog (click my name above, then select the “Contact” pagei).

    However, please correct me if I’m wrong, but is “liquid desiccant” not absorptive? In my mind, any cooling system which involves liquids and gases in a closed system running at a constant pressure is absorptive. But, again, please correct me if I have this wrong. (I have a rule: if I’m ever wrong about anything, I want to know about it!)

    I also a bit confused about why you’re saying the latter systems would cost 8 to 10 times as much. I mean, at its simplest and most abstract, such systems are nothing but some gases and some liquids moving between two or more chambers. Why are they so expensive? Is it the cost of the active chemicals, or the kit? And how does one lower the cost? IMHO, this last question is a business opportunity.

    I agree with you when you say “Another topic that needs to be touched is the relative ease of manufacture of RE system components, like parabolic trough and dish collectors,” This stuff is mostly simple kit which can be assembled by skilled craftspersons. As an aside, I have always loved the fact that you can make a highly effective parabolic concentrator by stretching a sheet of mirrored Mylar film across a circular frame, and apply a slight vacuum behind the film. It’s a pity Mylar doesn’t stand up to environmental exposure better. (IMHO, this last statement is another business opportunity.)

    And a trough collector is basically nothing but half a tube. BTW, I also take insight from the fact that for a trough collector aligned east-west, that the alignment towards the sun need only be done once a day. This allows for human adjustment in extremely low-tech, low-cost deployments in, for example, Africa. I know this is used to provide refrigeration in poor rural areas in the desert.

    I’m a bit confused about your mention of GPS. Since most kit doesn’t move, and if you know your Lat, Long and Altitude and the current time, then the position of the sun can be calculated easily from known principles. GPS reception takes quite a bit of power — there are better ways of determining the current time. Or did I misunderstand your intent?

    With regards to Internet tracking — I’m assuming by this you mean for data collection and analysis. Allowing a system to be tracked, monitored, and raise alerts.

    Lastly, with regards to your question about BL&P — you seem to hold some confusion on the situation. (Or, perhaps, I do.)

    My understanding is that BL&P still hold the sole license for grid-feeding power generation. As in, they have a legal monopoly. And, for the record, in the past I have worked closely with some of BL&P people, and I hold nothing but respect for them. They have a culture of engineering top to bottom, and it shows in the excellent service Barbados receives.

    The question before the decision and policy makers is how will the electrical marketplace be liberalized. This can be extremely tricky because it involves money, assets and opportunity. Who owns the power distribution component? Who has access to it? On what terms?

    As can be inferred from our current state of telecommunications liberalization, this process can take a very long time, and become very complicated… And, REE, I’m glad you have appeared when you did, because I believe that the more educated individuals arguing for alternative solutions, and educating the public and the government on the situation as it really is, the better.


  33. @ Not Psychotic

    You would have to determine your peak power demand which is just the maximum power drawn by given appliances that operate simultaneously at any given time. Assuming that your home is typical where few appliance have compressors or large motors namely refrigerator, deep freeze, washing machine or maybe a small AC unit your peak power would be somewhere between 1 and 10 kW (quite a large range yes I know but it all depends on lifestyle and what appliances and equipment you have). For modern natural gas ‘microturbines’ in this range a 25% – 30% gas to electricity efficiency would be expected. I am not sure how much is charged for natural gas here but if you use 450kWh of electricity per month you should be looking at a gas consumption of about 170 to140 cubic meters per month. So I guess you can work out the cost by finding out how much one cubic meter of natural gas costs here. As for prices of generators from a quick online search I am seeing between US$500 – US$1000 per kW capacity. Which would be US$2500 to US$5000 for a typical 5kW generator. Please note these are just ballpark figures further more in-depth analyses would have to be done for correct generator selection. In general a microturbine does not work to the economical benefit of small scale customers other than for back-up purposes, plus they tend to be quite loud and need regular and sometimes costly maintenance every 1 to 2 yrs and have a lifespan of between 5 to 10 years.


  34. @Chris

    The main reason that I did not mention the payback time is because it is a bit difficult to calculate as air conditioners tend to work at different duty cycles at different points in time and the system is a hybrid system where efficiency depends on a myriad of factors such as cooling load, solar radiation, humidity, temperature, thermal storage and thermal inertia of the building in which the system is installed. I had used simulation software to determine the cooling load of the building and the available solar radiation to determine the average instantaneous cooling demand for each month of the year and what kind of electrical power would be needed. But as for energy consumption a more detailed simulation would have to be done on the complete system including all the aforementioned variables something I am still working on (with rather slow progress due to my lack of deadline).What I can tell you is that from crude calculations assuming constant system efficiency investment payback time between 5 and 10 years with system life expectancy of about 15 to 20 years (this too is subject to further analysis).

    You are partially correct. Liquid desiccant is absorptive just that it is not a closed cycle but an open one, where the desiccant comes into direct contact with the air treated for air conditioning, dehumidifying it. The air can later be cooled evaporatively or by a conventional vapour compression unit.

    And I agree with you that the parabolic dish concentrator could be a good business venture we had done a demonstration one back at school doing just what you described and it worked quite well. They can be also quite easily molded from discarded satellite dishes or from a wire frame that could easily be calculated and constructed to specifications.

    As you know with concentration systems depending on the use, tracking maybe required. In some systems used for hot water and low pressure steam for heating and cooking an east-west orientation and daily, weekly or even monthly manual tracking (depending on design: concentration ratio etc.) or passive (thermo-expansion) tracking would suffice. In the case of concentrating photovoltaics, solar-fiber-optic lighting and medium-temperature solar thermal electricity/steam production (for either parabolic trough or fresnel concentrators) what is called medium precision active tracking is required. Sure one can calculate sun position (altitude, zenith and azimuth angles) but these calculations are not accurate enough for medium precision tracking so active tracking systems which can determine the position of the sun with greater exactitude are needed. Some of these tracking systems can be quite expensive where microprocessors control the movement of the collector constantly measuring radiation captured to determine optimal inclination. But new systems have been developed that use GPS systems and their inherent accuracy to calculate the relative position of the collector and the sun moving the collector as needed (although with less precision than microprocessor tracking). In terms of internet tracking I was wondering, since the collector is generally in a fixed position and the sun is that which moves, if there was any online system where after the input of the location, orientation and inclination of the collector could determine the relative position of the sun and collector (just as GPS would do but in this case without the satellite interface) in real-time translating this information to a servo-mechanism that would control collector movement. I have been unable so far to find such site.

    As for BL&P I have worked there in the past and I share the same respect you have for them. I believe you have answered my question because I was just wondering if the generation sector had been already liberalized as I honestly thought it had been just that no one had decided to enter the market as yet. Thanks. I will contact you directly in regards to my thesis.


  35. To RE Engineer

    Thanks for the information!


  36. If I May…

    There are times when visual beauty silences words…

    http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/08/the_large_hadron_collider.html


  37. Interesting possible new storage system from MIT, which could drastically reduce the cost of RE storage.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080731143345.htm


  38. Interesting possibilities of cheaper RE storage from MIT.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080731143345.htm


  39. David:

    My duplicate posts have disappeared into the ether, no moderation, nothing.

    The development I am bringing to the forum could eventually break the reliance of RE on Bl&P back-up.

    Truly enormous significance….. if it bears fruit.

    Fish one out, and let’s discuss it.

    Thank you.
    S t.

  40. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    Great development ST. Once they unlock the second half of the problem (another catalyst and electrode to produce hydrogen gas from the hydrogen ions and electrons) the technology should be good to go. This does sound extremely promising.

    As mentioned in an earlier thread, my gut feeling is that Metalloradicals hold the key… http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/277/5334/1953

    … then again, maybe that gut feeling is just the hangover from this weekend 🙂


  41. Amazing blog! Do you have any tips and hints for aspiring writers?
    I’m planning to start my own website soon but I’m a little lost on everything.
    Would you advise starting with a free platform like WordPress or go for a paid option?
    There are so many choices out there that I’m completely overwhelmed .. Any ideas? Thank you!


  42. A photovoltaic system on your home or business demonstrates your commitment to clean, renewable energy.


  43. When someone writes an post he/she maintains the plan of a user in his/her brain that how a
    user can understand it. Therefore that’s why this article is great. Thanks!


  44. Bodyweight training uses private personal body’s weight instead of machine pounds. When you are not to help do this, they are tell and again, no sale.


  45. WOW just what I was looking for. Came here by searching for click

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading