Greencheck.nl

De NRC meldt dat het rijk land wil verkopen om zo natuurbehoud te kunnen financieren. Dit lijkt op hetzelfde initiatief in Engeland waar het voorstel bestond om de staatsbossen te verkopen. Dit plan is geen goed idee omdat het geen antwoord biedt op de problematiek terwijl het meer macht geeft aan de veroorzakers van de problemen, namelijk de specualtieve partijen die samenwerken met de fossiele industrie. In plaats van land verkopen voor geld zou het Rijk het land beter kunnen benutten, bijvoorbeeld door er duurzame energie bronnen op te zetten zoals windmolens en die energie te verkopen op de markt en de opbrengst te gebruiken voor natuurbehoud en de uitbreiding van het eigen duurzame energie park. Misschien kunnen de gelden uit de privatisatie van de energie bedrijven hiervoor worden aangewend, of het waddenfonds, want die gelden zitten voor zover bekend nog steeds zonder reden (anders dan dat zolang er geen gebruik van wordt gemaakt er geen energie geleverd hoeft te moet worden en de energie bedrijven dus niet belast worden met de ‘hypotheek’ van hun eigen privatisatie) vast.

Roboeconomics is the economy of a society run on renewables. It has machines powered by renewables doing most of the important stuff, and people benefiting from that mechanized production without necessarily requiring them to work for income. Recycling is easier, the eco system can thrive along modern technology.

Germany is the first country that truely embraces this type of economy, although it might not yet know it. It going to create sources of unlimited renewable energy, as if they suddenly own a clean Cantarel field. It’s intention is official. Volkswagen recently also made a roboeconomic move by commiting to an investment of 1 billion Euro into a wind farm to power it’s factories. Renewables driving robots: Roboeconomy.

German is said in this article to plan an ‘energy turnaround’ and the question is ‘who will pay for this’. But in a roboeconomic world ‘money’ is unmasked for what it truly is, it is energy. So the renewable energy generated by the first and existing installations can power the production of further renewable energy sources, one can either sell it for euro’s and then buy energy to produce, or one can directly channel renewable energy to the silicon purification proces, the cutting of ingots the welding of windturbine poles etc. etc. After sufficient renewables are in place and fossil sources become unattainable the selfbreeding nature of renewable energy will become the expected norm. 

Fiat currency emitted by banks will find competition in energy certificates emitted by renewable energy producers. Those certificates will be the new money, and provide energy to the producers whose products consumers like best. The flaws of energy money lie in it’s location specificity, so it’s possible gold will function as a backup currency when translating one producers energy certificates into another, or a standard will be set for effective kwh and on unit can be spend on any renewable proeducer/consumer pair, forcing the producer to make as much electricity as it takes to deliver 1 kWh at the doorstep of the consumer.

Of course this means an incentive for producers to own their energy source, but als renewable manufactoring evolved into a robotic renewable driven process the cost of such energy sources will be close to nothing, it almost becomes a puzzle how to reward people in a cheap world of plentyfull renewable energy. 

Open design is open source for design. The main reason for open design is that no patent can be filed on the design, and as as result no investment can lock it up in a high price range. This is important becaus small wind turbines are disruptive, they can easily generate enough for the average household. Concepts like the Turby, Donqi and others have been systematically made more expensive without any real reason. What is the average person to think when a design is cheap in the prototype phase, but the end product has a maximized profit margin?

VAWTs or vertical axle wind turbines are cheaper and easier and quiter.. 

A vertical wind torque platform 

So here is the idea: we develop a vertical axle wind torque converter (VAWTC). So primarily it’s about a vertical turbine turning an axle producing torque. Usually that torque is used in a generator to produce electricity, but we won’t go into that in our first step. The modular system will consist of a set of designs for a vertical turbine that will produce torque, and modules that can use that torque for some purpose. That may be as an air pump, water pump or generator, it’s up to the builder.

Part of the core module 

The core mmodule will consist of supports, the main axle, the blade supports and the blades. 

Het begrip efficientie is niet toepasselijk als het om windturbines gaat. Het nodigt de vergelijking uit met bv. gas generatoren, terwijl wind geen schaars goed is, en gas wel. Efficientie doet de vertkale windmolens slecht voor de dag komen, terwijl ze eenvoudiger te maken zijn en dus kosteneffectiever. In de video hieronder wordt een simpele toevoeging aan windturbines besproken, een ring om de roterende wieken. Dit principe is ook gebruikt bij de DonQi, die om onduidelijke redenen erg duur is. Het is eenvoudig te zien dat het toevoegen van een ring aan bestaande turbines ook kosten effectief kan zijn. de ring is van polyester of metaal, maar eenvoudig van ontwerp en eenvoudig toe te voegen. Zo zou men de opbrengst van een bestaand windpark misschien kunnen verdrievoudigen. Een leuke bijkomstigheid is dat de turbines ook stiller worden..

Bewoners, bedrijven en instellingen kunnen vanaf 8 september 2011 subsidie aanvragen voor het plaatsen van zonnepanelen op ‘Haagse daken’. Deze regeling loopt tot 3 november. Meer informatie op de website van gemeente Den Haag. Bedrijven hebben al 10% Energie Investerings Aftrek. De prijs van panelen is in de afgelopen jaren redelijk gedaald terwijl de prijs van electriciteit voor kleinverbruikers blijft stijgen. Hierdoor duurt het staats korter voor u een volgende installatie kan aanschaffen voor hetzelfde geld. Een andere manier om over zonnepanelen te denken is om ze te beschouwen als een bron van inkomsten danwel het afkopen van (om te beginnen vaak 1/3) van uw electricteits lasten. Dit zorgt dat u geld overhoud voor andere zaken, en lijkt op een voor inflatie gecorrigeerde spaarpot waar tot 30 jaar lang geld uit kan komem.

"Trying to avoid the potential perils of European-style feed-in tariffs, California regulators are

moving forward with a new financing technique to stimulate immediate development

of small-scale renewable energy projects. " (bron)

Feed in tariffs are cost neutral. The way Germany did it was that those that do not generate renewable energy pay more to support those that do. It led to 50 times more solar PV installations than countries with direct subsidies. Some cities in Germany make millions a year because they could afford PV. The rule to not allow utilities into the equation (so all energy could be sold through the existing network) created a thriving PV market and millions of PV owners in a moderately sunny country. Energy allows productivity and a comfortable lifestyle, so the more the better one would say. Apparently people in California don’t agree with this assesment. Instead of a feed-in tariff it will try an auction. ‘Small projects’ has to be taken with a grain of salt, the minimal project cost will be about 2 million dollars. 

"Put simply, the idea is for developers to submit bids to utilities for 1.5- to 20-megawatt projects.

The proposals must be able to be completed within 18 months at the lowest cost possible."

There are positive aspects and negative ones in this scheme. On the positive side we find that large chunks of renewable energy can come online quickly at a low per Watt cost. The approach also has lots of drawbacks the primary one being that it maintains the centralized nature of power generation, which is less efficient than distributed (close to the consumer) generation of individual rooftop installations. Less individual installations means this approach creates less jobs than the German scheme. The usually  centralized nature of power distribution creates the powerbase of the current energy oligarchy. Rather than trying to break or restrict that oligarchy (as was done in Germany), this approache will enable it to shift its ‘monopoly’ to renewables.

This approach puts utilities in a position of power, allowing them to shop for the cheapest delivery of more electricity to sell without having to do anything for it themselves. The result may be that citizens never free themselves of the cost of energy, because they have to keep paying centralized suppliers in a financial system that will control the supply to maintain the revenues (because if the price drops due to over capacity funding new projects will not be possible). Of course the utilities are complaining about it, they want to make that cheap coal and gas and oil money. Now they can win (by delaying and protesting) and won’t have to lose (from decentralized schemes). Perfect arrangement for US standards.