[HappyVermonster]

How sweet is that? 32 acre solar orchard and it will power 430 homes. Yeehaw. Take that climate change. VT will lead the world to a greener future, and we love our greens.


Huge solar array proposed for South Burlington | The Burlington Free Press | Burlington, Vermont

[jackmccullough]

I think this is great. It doesn't replace Yankee, but we have to create lots more renewable and efficiency resources to replace Yankee and meet our needs.
It also creates jobs right here in Vermont.

[HappyVermonster]

Tax smax dude, who cares about taxes. 400+ houses are going carbon neutral renewable and it only takes a 32 acre orchard of panels. Way to go VT.

[looking4home]

If it was that easy, everyone would do it. Solar power is still very expensive, and in a climate like Vermont, with limited amounts of sunshine for much of the year, it's kind of ridiculous. It's almost like the punchline of a joke. We don't even do very much solar here in California, so that tells you something about its cost-effectiveness and reliability. But if it makes you feel good about yourself and Vermont, more (solar) power to you!

[harry chickpea]

I agree with looking4home. The year before I left the state, there was no sun for about three months. Putting solar cells in a cave for 3/12ths of the year does not provide a good return on investment.

2.2 megawatts (at peak conditions)... I forget the actual figures of insolation, but an average of 5 hrs/day of 2.2 megawatts over an entire year would be more than fair. Solar cell output drops significantly as the sun is lower in the sky. That puts it at 20% of the day. 20% of 2.2 megawatts = less than 1/2 megawatt continuous. 24 hours x 30 days x .5 megawatt = 360 megawatt hours per month.

A megawatt is 1,000,000 watts. A kilowatt is 1,000 watts. Our average consumption (with electric heat pump in AL and warmer climate) is 1400 kwh per month, or 1.4 megawatt hours. That would be a system generating a power equivalent of the use of 257 homes like ours, not the 400+ figure in the article. Drop about seven of those homes to account for conversion and line loss in delivery.

Figuring that we buy power retail (without taxes and other fees) for about 10 cents per kwh, the retail value of the monthly output is what, $35,000? On a practical basis, the total cost of the project would have to be less than $750,000 for it to be worthwhile, which is orders of magnitude under current solar costs.

This is a "spin" project that only makes financial sense to the developers. As far as the grid is concerned, it has little or no effect. Power has to be supplied to customers whether or not the sun shines. Because of that, direct solar feed projects cannot impact the size of the other power plants on the grid.

The wood burning plant really was about the best alternative energy source plant developed in Vermont in the past fifty years. Other than that, recommissioning of the dam at Bolton Falls (also in the 2 megawatt range) and renovation of the Waterbury dam was probably the "greenest" power project.

But solar power in Vermont does have a nice Quixotic aspect after all the tilting at windmills.

[arctichomesteader]

Solar can be useful on a small scale up here (individual systems on a home), but I think trying to make a commercial solar power plant here is a bad idea. Wind and hydro power are much more practical.

BTW: There's a lot of uranium in Vermont. Many wells in Northern VT have been contaminated by it. We could in fact be energy independent in this state if there was the will to do so (the will to use our nucelear power abilities, and to put in dams and wind projects) and not back down to greenpeace et al. (who oppose nuclear and hydro) and the second home owners who would have their view upset by a wind tower.

[Bang!]

So, if solar is renewable does this mean that when the solar panels end-of-life in 15+/- years new ones will grow in the orchard? Just asking.

Food for thought, have you ever seen a solar panel manufacturing plant powered by solar panels?

[MikeSL]

Insulation and lighting are the keys to lowering energy demands. Would love to have solar and other renewable energy but I am renting so not really an issue?

[ex-springfielder]

If you include the energy it takes to produce the materials for the solar panels, the panels themselves, the batteries for storage and the construction to put them in place they are far from being a carbon free energy source.

[looking4home]

I'd re-think my endorsement of wind power, if I were you, arctichomesteader. All the Euro plants that manufactured these things have gone our of business when the govt. subsidies stopped, and they are bailing on them all over Europe. So now the green energy/wind salesmen crowd are coming over here trying to snooker us, or rather the government, to bankroll these things. I don't know how to post links on here, but all you have to do is type "abandonded wind turbines" in your search engine and you will find a lot of articles that are very eye-opening and, frankly, shocking. Actually, it's not only happening in Europe, it's happening here. In my state of California, we have a huge wind development in the Altamont Pass, not too far from where I live. They are all defunct now, and here's another shocker that I learned - a lot of those turbines you see with its blades spinning around are just for show! They aren't producing any energy, they simply keep them spinning to trick people into thinking that green energy is being produced.