Energy

Power outages are even more costly to food producers and distributors than they are to the rest of us. Loss of refrigeration can mean loss of product. Safety rules often require shut-down and sanitizing even if the outage is short. So it’s not surprising that the food industry is turning to off-grid for more reliable electric supply.

Bluehouse Greenhouse, which specializes in sustainable indoor agriculture has hired developer Endurant to build an off-grid microgrid for the company’s 2.8 million square ft. greenhouse. The highly-automated glass structure will produce 50 million pounds of fresh produce annually.

Why go off-grid?

Bluehouse Greenhouse decided it was too expensive and too difficult to interconnect with the grid. “We had to think about what is the most resilient solution, where are we going to get the most benefit for our money and investment, and where are we going to have the most secure energy system,” said Ari Kashani, CEO and founder of Bluehouse Greenhouse.  Most microgrid developers find that grid-connection approvals significantly delay their projects. Will others follow the Bluehouse Greenhouse model?

And another two!

Most North American microgrids are grid connected, allowing them to take services from the grid or sell services to the grid as needed. But Taylor Farms is going entirely off-grid. The major California fresh food producer is building a standalone power supply in partnership with Bloom Energy, Ameresco and Concept Clean Energy.

Almond World, a refrigerated cold storage developer in California’s Central Valley, is another food facility that is taking its energy operation off-grid. The company has partnered with Origo Investments to build a facility in the Madera Airport Industrial Park that will include an off-grid microgrid designed and built by Scale Microgrid Solutions.

Bimbo Bakeries, the maker of such products as Thomas’ English muffins, Arnold bread, and Sara Lee and Entenmann’s pastries is installing microgrids to meet its sustainability goals. The company announced plans in 2022 to install microgrids at six manufacturing facilities over the next year with the help of GreenStruxure, a subsidiary of Schneider Electric.

And there’s more…

But its not just food companies which are going out on their own.  Sunnova  – the rooftop solar company – has gone into housing development to provide itself the rooves it needs.

It’s not always easy to develop community microgrids because they clash with the conventional utility model. So Sunnova has proposed a new approach — microutilities that operate standalone facilities in newly built California neighborhoods of fewer than 2,000 customers. The plan requires state regulatory approval.

Like Sunnova, Cuyahoga County, Ohio, sees outdated utility rules getting in the way of energy development, so it is creating its own utility company. The county utility will oversee multiple microgrids built to encourage economic activity and improve energy resilience.

Even Energy companies are going off the grid!

Entergy is among many existing utility companies investing in microgrids as part of its …

Generating electricity from a river or waterfall can be a great way to access sustainable energy more reliably than solar or wind, and all year round. Effective power generation requirements vary from case to case.  Consider the different types of turbines available and their specific application. This guide discusses the three main types of turbines suitable for generation: Pelton wheel, Francis turbine and Kaplan turbine. It is hard to provide guidance on commercial products that would work best for each system configuration because of lack of supply and constantly fluctuating prices.  If you are a supplier or a customer with useful experiences, please leave details in the comments including URLs. However, the info below gives all you need to search out products in your own area.

Why generate 5KW from a waterfall or river?

Hydroelectric power generation has been around for centuries, but the latest technologies are more efficient, allowing greater amounts of power to be generated with less impact on the environment. Hydroelectricity is clean and sustainable energy, and more cost-effective than traditional sources such as coal-fired plants or petrol generators. Not only does this reduce carbon footprint, it also takes advantage of one of nature’s most abundant resources: running water. Harnessing the power of rivers and waterfalls offers benefits in terms of reducing air pollution from burning fossil fuels as well as providing local jobs installing and maintaining these systems. With careful planning, 5KW turbines can not only provide enough energy for homes and businesses but can also feed excess electricity to neighbours (or into the grid).

The best turbine to generate 5KWh from a waterfall or river

The choice of turbine will depend on the specific conditions of the site, in particular water flow rate and head.  Water flow is how much water passes through the hydro plant, and head refers to water pressure -ie how hard/quickly it flows. In general, Pelton wheel turbines are ideal for high head sites with lower flow rates, whereas Francis turbines are better suited for medium-head sites with higher flow rates. The Kaplan turbine is suitable for low head/high flow applications although it tends to be less efficient than other types of turbines due to its complex design.

Pelton wheel: best suited for high head, low flow applications

The Pelton wheel turbine is  the most popular type of turbines for hydroelectric power and likely to be the least expensive. It is suitable for high head and low flow applications, where the water pressure is greater than the flow rate. It works by using a series of buckets or cups which capture and redirect the water’s kinetic energy as it passes through them to spin a shaft connected to an electric generator. You will also need to buy a generator like this one. The buckets are angled in such a way that they capture more force from each wave as it …

Power companies in Florida are warning residents of another major increase in your electricity bill.
A request sent by FPL and Duke energy in December to raise rates by over 10% has been approved by the state regulators, stating that even the power companies are struggling with the fuel prices.
The average monthly bill will be increased by up to $5 according to FPL, but for Duke energy consumers, it will be raised by almost $20.
With this news, the energy companies are providing tips for customers on how to save power through their websites, as well as payment plans for those who are struggling financially.
Small businesses are cutting back the best they can, but with the current prices being the highest in more than 10 years, the uncertainty is also rising. Local residents talk of dreading the months ahead, and ideas of moving over to solar energy are being raised.
See more on this story here…

West London, UK – 17.12.2022. A huge housing development on the West side of UK capital city has had to be postponed because the developers cannot obtain a grid connection for another ten years. The problem is overloading of grid capacity due to renewables which need access intermittently at unpredictable times – meaning the grid owners cannot plan ahead and have to leave surplus capacity unused.

It will take up to a decade to bulk up grid capacity and get developments under way again in three west London boroughs — Hillingdon, Ealing and Hounslow. In those boroughs, “major new applicants to the distribution network . . . including housing developments, commercial premises and industrial activities will have to wait several years to receive new electricity connections”, according to a note from the Greater London Authority which oversees the capital’s utility infrastructure.

Part of this is just bad management by the company National Grid which is also coming under criticism for its operations in the Eastern United States. Part of the problem lies with Utility regulator Ofgem, which has, worryingly, just been awarded responsibility for the future planning of the UK electricity supply.

The problems faced by London are also popping up everywhere else in the world, as the huge demand for renewable energy installation come up against the realities of the current, ageing grid network.

The projects go on waiting lists that can now stretch for years, and many ultimately drop off when the delays become intolerable. In the United States, according to reports in the New York Times, enough renewable energy projects are backlogged right now to achieve a largely clean electric grid by 2030. But without urgent action, most are unlikely to get built.

It is the smaller, local power lines running through state-designated transmission corridors that are the main problem. Strung alongside interstates and highways, they were designed decades ago and are just not fat enough to carry more electricity from solar and wind projects. Unless these lines are upgraded with new wires, connecting too many wind or solar farms could cause the cables to overheat, leading to power outages.

Electrical utilities have been caught flat-footed by the falling costs and rapid growth of renewable energy, says the NY Times. “They simply failed to get ahead of the wave and upgrade their wires, and the state governments that oversee the power business neglected to hold them accountable.

“In every state, a public utility commission is charged with regulating the power business, and for too long the decisions of these bodies have flown under the radar. As the climate crisis worsens and our goals for limiting the damage slip farther out of reach, citizens need to show up and make clear to the utilities and their regulators that they want action now.”…

Calculations by Off-Grid.net show the EU total liability under the new Cop27 agreement announced in Egypt today, is $11.36 trillion.

Assets of the Loss & Damage fund are currently standing at zero, but countries will be under pressure to contribute quickly. The speed at which this should be paid is open to debate and clearly depends on what each country can afford, but the total EU bill is relatively easy to calculate.

About $2 trillion of the $11.4 trillion is directly attributable to the EU itself, rather than being owed by its 27 member countries, because the basic tenets that the European Commission has promoted since it was first founded in 1952, encouraged, indeed coerced, its member states to burn fossil fuels.

Loss and damage refers to the most severe impacts of extreme weather on the physical and social infrastructure of poor countries, and the financial assistance needed to rescue and rebuild them.

It was the most contentious issue at the COP27 conference, and has been a long-running demand by developing countries since 1992. For nearly two weeks, the EU and the US refused demands from poor countries for a new fund to address loss and damage, arguing that existing funds should be redirected for the purpose. Early on Friday morning, the EU made a U-turn, to agree to a fund on condition that big economies and big emitters still classed as developing countries under the UNFCCC rules, which date back to 1992, should be included as potential donors, and excluded as recipients.

From its very first moment, the EU was all about burning energy – it had been brought into being to foster the burning of coal, the production of power, and the regulation of giant corporate interests.

It launched in 1952, called the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). In 2002 Romano Prodi said: “The ECSC was a courageous and hugely significant leap forward for Europe. It was Europe’s first step in pooling a part of each country’s sovereignty for the greater good of all who took part. It was the ECSC which first established shared, supranational institutions for Europe – the basis of the EU as we know it today and a milestone in political history. History will record the founding of the ECSC as a defining moment.”

The stated aim of the ECSC was “economic expansion, employment and better living standards.” They achieved all three – but at what cost?

The Coal and Steel Group had a High Authority to:

• supervise the market;
• monitor compliance with competition rules; and
• ensure price transparency

The aim of the 1952 treaty, as stated in its Article 2, was to contribute, through the common market for coal and steel, to economic expansion, employment and better living standards. Thus, the institutions had to ensure an orderly supply of coal and steel to the common market by ensuring equal …