The Oil Spill and You

Commentary
by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin
July 12, 2010

About 100 people gathered in downtown Madison in early July to take part in “Hands Across the Sands,” an internationally organized protest against continued oil drilling in and along the world’s coastal waters. Against the backdrop of the weed-choked waters of Lake Monona, they joined hands for 15 minutes to express their fervent desire to see a cleaner, less destructive energy future emerge from the liquid melanoma spreading across the Gulf of Mexico.

No doubt the protestors would like to do more, much more, than simply engage in ritualized protest in front of a few camera crews. But we live in a society that is organized around the expectation of a limitless supply of nonrenewable hydrocarbons feeding concentrated energy into our economic bloodstream. Most of us have not bothered to comprehend the yawning gulf that lies between our best intentions and our abject dependence on the wealth-producing properties of petroleum. Nor how this addiction fills us with delusions of godlike mastery over our environment while blinding us to the reality that we humans have grossly overshot our planet’s carrying capacity.

For those who read and still remember the science fiction classic Dune, the “spice” on Arrakis remains the quintessential literary analogy to the reality of Earth’s oil. Like our oil, the spice held a special place in that world as the ultimate prize worth waging wars and plundering hostile environments for.

To carry the analogy further, if oil has become the spice, as it were, of America, then America has become our planet’s House of Harkonnen. Each great power has been willing to deploy their military supremacy to launch pre-emptive strikes on distant lands to assert control over the most valuable resource in their domain. In Dune, the invasion of Arrakis began as a rout, but over time evolved into a wearying, treasury-sapping occupation that ultimately cost the House of Harkonnen its status as a great power. Sound familiar?

Extracting these highly prized resources is dangerous business. On Arrakis, careless spice miners wind up as snack food for giant sandworms coursing through the sands. On our fair planet, British Petroleum’s stumbling ways a mile below the sea surface let loose a lethal eruption and a tide of goo now washing over countless estuaries and coastal outposts dense with life.

Just as the universe in Dune revolves around the spice, petroleum sets the rhythms and beats that make up life in America. It powers our comings and goings, our getting and spending. It is the fuel that carries us and our possessions across continents and over oceans. It makes possible the transporting of lettuce grown in California to supermarkets in Florida, and enables an envelope picked up in Phoenix to be flown to Memphis and then to Seattle in under 24 hours.

In fact, petroleum is the fuel of fuels, powering diesel trains that pull 130 carfuls of Wyoming coal to electric generating stations in Wisconsin and Georgia. Diesel seems to be everywhere, in tankers carrying crude oil, in trucks hauling solar electric panels, and in cranes assembling 250-ton wind energy turbines.

It’s worth mentioning that all the boats that gather shrimp and oysters from the Louisiana coastline are equipped with engines that run on diesel fuel. Gone are the days when baymen reached their favored fishing grounds using muscle power and wind energy. Without petroleum, shrimping ceases to be the industrial enterprise it is today.

But while diesel is ubiquitous, crude oil is not. The big, shallow reservoirs have all been discovered and many of them are showing signs of exhaustion. But as long as the demand for petroleum remains at current levels, oil companies have no choice but to fan out to the most remote corners to find the next big strike. Yet because we have fashioned an economy that can’t operate “normally” without petroleum, it will be extremely challenging, if not downright impossible, to effect an organized program of reducing oil consumption through political channels. To the extent we’ll see any policy response to our energy predicament, it is highly unlikely that it will be anything more enlightened than what the House of Harkonnen cooked up under similar circumstances.

Americans from all walks of life believe that we can accomplish anything if we put our collective will and ingenuity to it. But invoking that appealing myth will not help us extricate ourselves from our present predicament. What we need instead is the capacity to envision a fulfilling and livable world without copious quantities of petroleum. Only then do we have a chance of breaking the spell that has put us in the thrall of this wondrous energy source.

Need I mention that once you begin to appreciate the finitude of the Earth’s endowment of petroleum, there’s nothing to stop you from taking immediate steps to curb your personal consumption of this irreplaceable fuel. Whatever you do to lessen your dependence on petroleum will turn out to be a much more satisfying and meaningful response to our energy predicament than any canned protest promoted through Facebook.
As for myself, I made two resolutions since the Macondo well erupted. The first is to go through this summer without activating the household air-conditioner. So far, so good, I can report. (Luckily, we were spared the triple-digit temperature swelterfest that gripped the East Coast last week). It wasn’t that long ago that life without air-conditioning was the norm rather than the exception. If we all resolved not to turn on air-conditioners, we could force the retirement of two to three coal-fired plants in this state.

The other change was to ratchet up my reliance on my bicycle and make it the default vehicle for all my local travels, irrespective of weather conditions. I have been a fair-weather bicycle commuter for many years, but after watching everyone on TV blame someone else for the catastrophe, I felt the need to push myself a little harder. My objective here is to regard my car as a luxury that one day I might do without.

Though the extra perspiration and the occasional dodging of raindrops may take some getting used to, you are going to sleep better at night. Trust me on this.

If the oil spill has prompted a similar response from you, feel free to describe them and send them to the moderator of our Peak Oil blog below. Thank you.

Michael Vickerman is executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization. For more information on the global and national petroleum and natural gas supply picture, visit "The End of Cheap Oil" section in RENEW Wisconsin's web site: www.renewwisconsin.org. These commentaries also posted on RENEW’s blog: http://renewwisconsinblog.org and Madison Peak Oil Group’s blog: http://www.madisonpeakoil-blog.blogspot.com

A Cruel Month for Clean Energy

A commentary
by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin
May 4, 2010

Renewable energy businesses and activists entered the month of April with high hopes of seeing the State Legislature pass the Clean Energy Jobs Act (CEJA), a comprehensive bill designed to propel Wisconsin toward energy independence, along the way creating thousands of new jobs and strengthening the sustainable energy marketplace. This comprehensive bill would have raised the renewable energy content of electricity sold in Wisconsin, while stepping up ratepayer support for smaller-scale renewable energy installations throughout the state.

Unfortunately, on April 22, the State Senate adjourned for the year without taking action on the Clean Energy Jobs Act bill, effectively killing the measure and leaving hundreds of businesses and individuals who campaigned for the bill empty-handed.

If life imitates poetry, then the line that opens T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land—“April is the cruelest month”—aptly encapsulates the evolution of a campaign that overcame many obstacles in the final weeks only to be undermined by the unwillingness of Senate leaders to schedule a vote on the bill. The sense of anticipation that began the month was swept away by a combination of personal feuds, extreme partisanship, and increasingly polarized public attitudes toward climate change. That the bill’s demise coincided with the 40th anniversary of Earth Day was seen by supporters as an especially cruel twist of fate.

It certainly didn’t help matters that the some of the state’s most politically entrenched constituencies banded together to fight CEJA at every stage of the process. Among the hard-core opponents were Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the Paper Council and the Farm Bureau. Their vociferous opposition scuttled bipartisanship, eliminating the possibility that a Republican legislator would vote for the bill.

Working hand-in-glove with vitriolic right-wing radio talk show hosts, the opposition supplied their grassroots faithful with a smorgasbord of exaggerated claims, hyperbole, outright fantasy, and pseudoscience. Though the analysis purporting to document the opposition’s assertions set a new low in academic rigor, it succeeded in its aim, which was to plant the seeds of fear among certain legislators about the ultimate cost of this legislation before the bill was even introduced.

Working just as vigorously for the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a broad spectrum of interests answered the requests for help. Whether they were one-person solar installation businesses or Fortune 500 corporations like Milwaukee-based Johnson Controls, CEJA supporters wrote letters, made phone calls, and corralled their legislators at the Capitol on several days during March and April.

In dozens of face-to-face meetings with their representatives, CEJA supporters made the case for this bill by bringing out their own experiences as business owners, farmers, educators, builders, and skilled tradesmen. They presented a local and highly personal angle to the clean energy policy debate that many legislators had not appreciated before. Their passion and energy were instrumental in giving this bill a fighting chance for passage at the end of the session. Unfortunately, the campaign could not overcome the pique of the Senate Democrats.

One legislator who kept pushing this ambitious bill up the legislative hill until the very last day was Assembly representative Spencer Black, who was one of the four principal authors of the measure. CEJA supporters are indebted to Rep. Black for his vigorous leadership and his determined efforts to round up support among his compatriots for passing this bill.

Two rays of sunlight did manage to pierce through the heavy clouds at the close of April, prompted by the dedication of the two largest wind turbines owned by Wisconsin schools. In each case, the school erected a 100-kilowatt Northwind turbine manufactured by Vermont-based Northern Power Systems. One serves Wausau East High School while the other feeds power to the Madison Area Technical College’s Fort Atkinson branch. The turbines will offset a significant fraction of the electricity consumed at each school.

Located well within the city limits of Wausau and Fort Atkinson, these 155-foot-tall wind generators eloquently testify to the breadth and depth of public support for renewable energy across Wisconsin. Next January, the Legislature will witness the return of clean energy supporters with similar legislation for strengthening Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace. In the meantime, we will be working hard to achieve a very different outcome.

END

Michael Vickerman is the executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization headquartered in Madison. For more information on Wisconsin renewable energy policy, visit RENEW’s web site at: www.renewwisconsin.org.

We Energies Wins Praise for Support of Clean Energy Jobs Act

A news release issued by RENEW Wisconsin:

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 21, 2010

MORE INFORMATION
Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

We Energies Wins Praise for Support of Clean Energy Jobs Act

A leading renewable energy advocacy group praised Milwaukee-based We Energies for its support of the Clean Energy Jobs Act legislation (Assembly Bill 649).

On Tuesday (April 20), We Energies distributed a memo explaining its support to all members of the state Assembly.

We Energies’ memo followed a similar memo last week from Clean, Responsible Energy for Wisconsin’s Economy (CREWE), a coalition of businesses and utilities supporting the legislation. Other utility members of CREWE are Alliant Energy, Madison Gas & Electric, WPPI Energy, Xcel Energy, and American Transmission Company.

“We Energies deserves praise for stepping out and speaking up on its own,” said Michael Vickerman,” executive director of RENEW Wisconsin.

“We Energies expressed its positive vision for a renewable energy future and the jobs that come with it,” added Vickerman.

The memo from Joel Haubrich, We Energies, said:

We Energies urges support for AB 649.

Throughout the process we have supported moving from our current 10% by 2015 renewable mandate to the 25% by 2025 renewable mandate. It will be a massive effort to meet the requirements in the legislation but we will . . . work to achieve the goal when it becomes law.

Recently, we asked the authors for specific changes to the legislation. On Monday, April 19, we believe we resolved our concerns and now can support the bill.

The changes we believe the authors have agreed to include: 1) incorporating language on “utility rate of return,” 2) removing the ambiguity as to who can perform energy conservation work, 3) allowing efficiency to count from 2016 to 2020 and 4) changing nuclear findings to previously agreed upon language.

We Energies urges support for these amendments and urges support for AB 649. (Emphasis in the original.)

END

RENEW Wisconsin (HUwww.renewwisconsin.orgUH) is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that acts as a catalyst to advance a sustainable energy future through public policy and private sector initiatives.

Energizing Fort Atkinson’s schools from the sun and earth

The solar water heating systems serve Fort Atkinson high school and the middle school. The radiant energy striking the rooftop panels year-round is efficiently collected and taken inside to preheat the swimming pools inside each structure. Except during the winter months, the incoming solar energy is sufficient to maintain pool temperatures at 84°F. Even in January, however, the savings that a solar hot water system yields simply by preheating a pool to 70°F is substantial when multiplied over several decades.

As a result of educating themselves on the connection between energy use and atmospheric pollution, several school districts in Wisconsin are taking increasingly aggressive steps to conserve energy as well as produce a portion of what they use on-site. Some have embraced ground source heat pump systems (Fond du Lac High School), while others have installed solar hot water systems (Osceola Middle School) and solar electric systems (Paul Olson elementary school in Madison). Not to be outdone, Wausau East High School recently installed a 100 kW Northwind turbine, which is now the largest wind generator attached to a school building in Wisconsin.

Yet if one measures success by substantial reductions in energy expenditures and emissions reductions, there is one school district in Wisconsin that stands head and shoulders above its peers: Fort Atkinson. Serving 2,700 school-age children in a community of 12,000, the Fort Atkinson School District operates six buildings: four elementary schools, one middle school and a high school. School officials have made no secret of their aspiration to make Fort Atkinson the most energy-efficient and self-sufficient K-12 district in the state.

Since 2005, Fort Atkinson has rigorously pursued a sustainable energy agenda that integrates, in a systematic and complementary fashion, continuous monitoring of consumption, aggressive building efficiency measures, and renewable energy capture. As articulated in its 2009 energy plan, the district, the district’s principal goals for 2010 are nothing if not ambitious:

+ Pare energy costs by 20% from 2005 levels;
+ Lower carbon emissions by 25% from 2005 levels;
+ Obtain EnergyStar certification for all six schools; and
+ Install on-site renewable production at all six schools.

Virtually every renewable energy technology or efficiency measure available to a Wisconsin K-12 district has already been or is about to be deployed somewhere in Fort Atkinson. This lengthy list includes ground source heat pumps, solar hot water systems, lighting retrofits, tankless water heaters, retro-commissioning, occupancy sensors, window replacement, and roof insulation. The most recent system to be installed, a 50 kilowatt wind turbine at the high school, will be operational by Christmas 2009.

The integrated approach pursued by Fort Atkinson leads to lower operating expenses, which in turn frees up capital for renewable technologies that have higher up-front costs but will deliver energy to the school buildings long after the initial investment is paid off. At the same time, converting sunlight and wind into useful energy sources enable building owners to reduce the variability of their utility costs. For a school district, that means not having to worry about the effect of a colder-than-normal winter on next year’s budget for textbooks.


The solar water heating systems serving the high school and the middle school neatly illustrate this benefit. The radiant energy striking the rooftop panels year-round is efficiently collected and taken inside to preheat the swimming pools inside each structure. Except during the winter months, the incoming solar energy is sufficient to maintain pool temperatures at 84°F. Even in January, however, the savings that a solar hot water system yields simply by preheating a pool to 70°F is substantial when multiplied over several decades.

The capital required to heat a swimming pool with solar energy is not trivial. For the 48-panel system atop the high school, the installed cost totaled $198,000, while the 32-panel installation serving the middle school came in at $115,000. Dennis Kuchenmeister, who manages the district’s buildings and grounds, estimates a 5% return on investment (ROI) for the high school’s system and an 11% ROI on the middle school’s system. According to Kuchenmeister, the hot water systems will supply about 60% of the heat going into the pools, displacing the equivalent of nearly 9,000 therms a year. The district expects to save $18,000 in avoided fuel costs per year.

Kuchenmeister’s economic estimates factor in incentives from Focus on Energy covering up to 35% of the total installed cost and matching incentives from We Energies, the local utility serving the school district. By taking full advantage of available incentive dollars, the school district was able to reduce the out-of-pocket portion of installation costs by more than 50%.

Because the annual harvest of solar energy striking a particular spot rarely fluctuates by more than 10%, a building owner can be reasonably confident of how much conventional energy an installation will displace. In contrast, the cost of heating a pool with natural gas can easily triple during a 12-month period even when usage remains constant. This in fact happened to Fort Atkinson in the 12 months preceding the installation of its two solar hot water systems in the fall of 2008.

Thus, the real value of Fort Atkinson’s solar hot water installations is in minimizing the district’s exposure to the price volatility associated with unregulated fossil fuels like natural gas. And while it’s true that natural gas prices are presently at five-year lows, they could easily bounce back to 2008 levels in a year or two, depending on events over which end-users have no control. However, by installing a renewable technology that preheats their swimming pools, the Fort Atkinson has effectively insured itself against a repeat appearance of the fossil fuel rollercoaster ride that most school districts would just as soon forget.

There are two other reasons why school buildings are well-matched for solar energy installations. First, the buildings themselves are dedicated to a public function that is expected to last for several generations. In such settings it is easier to justify the additional up-fronts costs, especially if the installation also communicates a valuable lesson in sustainability to the entire community. Second, most schools, especially newer ones, have an abundance of flat, unshaded roof space that can support large arrays, irrespective of building orientation.

Real-time production data from both installations can be accessed online by visiting www.fatspaniel.net and searching for the live sites listed under We Energies. The district also uses Energy Watchdog, a web-based program provided by Focus on Energy to track energy usage. This program enables Fort Atkinson to document the energy and cost reductions from measures specified in its energy plan.

The middle school is also one of four schools in Fort Atkinson equipped with ground source heat pump systems that heat and cool the buildings year-round using the nearly constant temperatures in the ground. These systems heat buildings in the winter and cool them in the summer. Ground source heat pump systems are electrically powered; no heating fuel like natural gas or propane is needed to heat the four schools.

“We essentially cut the gas line to our schools,” said Kuchenmeister during a presentation on his district’s sustainable energy initiative last November in Milwaukee.

The operational costs of ground source heat pumps are substantially lower than the HVAC systems they replace. As a result of their renovation, the three elementary schools have seen their energy intensity drop by more than one-half, even though they now have air-conditioning in the classrooms. School officials estimate that all four ground source heat pump systems will save the district $30,000 annually in fuel costs.

As with solar hot water systems, Focus on Energy provides incentives for ground source heat pumps to schools, businesses and residences. The program awarded more than $96,000 towards the four systems installed in Fort Atkinson.

According to a Focus on Energy fact sheet, “a ground source heat pump system is arguably the most efficient technology for heating and cooling Wisconsin homes and businesses.” Given its embrace of that technology and others deployed in its buildings, Fort Atkinson has become, in terms of energy sustainability, arguably the most forward-thinking school district in the state.

Sun Harvest Farm: Solar hot water and more

The Koerner's installed the domestic hot water system (right)in March 2006. It also provides a portion of the heat for the house.

Sun Harvest Farm, owned by Jerry and Penny Kroener, Ridgeway, WI
Renewable Energy Projects
September 2009 Update

General:
In 2005 we embarked on major renovations and additions to our old farmhouse. This included working with Focus on Energy to have site assessments performed for Solar Photovoltaic, Solar Thermal and Wind Turbine Systems. We also investigated wood burning systems because we have substantial quantities of firewood on our property. Our decisions included the following:
1. Add additional insulation, all new windows and new doors.
2. Replace our old oil burning furnace with a high efficiency propane boiler (our little Munchkin).
3. Install a Solar Photovoltaic grid-connected system to produce electricity.
4. Install a Solar Thermal (hot water) system to preheat domestic hot water and provide some house heat.
5. Install a counter-flow masonry heater fireplace using our own limestone for the masonry cladding.
6. In 2008 we built and installed a hot air collector to provide some heat in our barn workshop.
7. In 2009 we installed our 2nd Photovoltaic grid-connected system.
8. In 2009 we also upgraded our solar hot water storage tank.

Improving Efficiency
Our first goal was to improve the efficiency of the areas in the old part of the farmhouse, and to include very high efficiency within the new addition. We installed new Pella windows and doors throughout. Additional insulation was added where possible and a moisture/air barrier under new fiber cement siding, which was installed on the entire house. The new construction included R-21 insulation in the walls and blown-in R-50 in the ceiling. We removed the old oil-fired hot water heater and the oil burner from the warm air furnace. A high efficiency propane gas boiler (Munchkin T-50) was installed to be our back up for heating and the new domestic hot water tank. We also installed radiant under floor heating in the new great room area and plan to install additional radiant heating in certain of the old house areas. The existing warm air furnace was retained, with the addition of a water-to-air heat exchanger, which allowed us keep the central AC unit and also to provide warm air heating to the upstairs area. We have also installed compact fluorescent light bulbs throughout the entire house and in the barn workshop area.

Solar Thermal Hot Water System
Our system as designed to provide domestic hot water and a portion of the house heating and was put into operation in March 2006. It includes:
+ Eight 4 ft x 10 ft Heliodyne Gobi 410 collectors, ground-mounted at a 60 degree tilt angle
+ 1000 gallon concrete hot water storage tank, with EPDM rubber liner
+ Approximately 600 ft of 1 inch copper tubing made into coils for heat exchangers
+ Pump, valves, expansion tanks, controller, copper piping, propylene glycol, insulation, etc.

We performed a considerable amount of the work to install the system including:
+ Installing the concrete tank and liner
+ Bending the tubing into coils and installing them in the tank
+ Installing 14 concrete pillars
+ Digging trenches and installing piping from collectors into basement
+ Erecting the framework and the collectors

We worked with Light Energy Systems of Madison (now Full Spectrum Solar) to design the system and to provide the parts and some of the labor. The total system cost was approximately $20,000, but we received a Focus on Energy grant of $3,000 and a Federal Tax Credit of $2,000 so our out-of-pocket costs were about $15,000.

During 2009 we decided to replace the concrete tank due to excessive moisture problems in the basement area. We demolished the tank piece by piece and carried it out of the basement. We replaced it with a tank made by STSS Co. Inc from Mechanicsburg PA. The new tank is collapsible so it can be moved through regular sized doorways. When in place it will be 80 round and 4 high with all penetrations installed at the factory according to our heat exchanger specifications. It is sealed, insulated and with hold up to 822 gallons of water. We reused the copper heat exchangers that we had made for the old tank. We also installed a heat dump under the solar collectors, which was made of 24 ft of Slant Fin baseboard hydronic registers. The purpose of the heat dump is to dissipate excess heat produced during the summer when we only use the hot water for pre-heating the domestic hot water. The total costs for the new tank, including demolishing the old tank, were about $3,500.

Masonry Heater Fireplace
We investigated wood-burning systems and decided to build a masonry heater fireplace in order to take advantage of renewable resources on our property. We have an ample supply of trees on our property that we harvest by cutting dead trees. We constructed a woodshed that dries and stores about 10 cords of split firewood.

The fireplace is specially designed to be efficient and environmentally friendly because the combustion chamber burns at between 1500-2000 degrees F. The fire burns for 2-3 hours but the large amount of masonry mass stores and radiates the heat for 12-24 hours. Our fireplace is centrally located so it radiates heat over a large area of our kitchen and great room. Two stainless steel U-Tube heat exchangers are also built into the core to capture some heat, which is circulated to the solar storage tank in the basement.

The core of our heater was designed by Heat-Kit of Canada, but originated centuries ago from designs in Europe and Russia. Gimme Shelter Construction of Amherst, WI constructed the core.

We decided to use natural limestone and sandstone from our property for the masonry cladding. Some of the stones were recovered from the foundation of our old summer kitchen. We performed the masonry work ourselves, which saved us $20,000+ in labor costs. Our cost for the core, chimney materials and mortar for the limestone was approximately $12,000.

Solar Photovoltaic Electric System # 1
This system was designed to produce about half of our annual electricity needs and was put into operation in April 2006. We chose a grid-tied system that sends excess electricity to the Alliant Energy power grid. We have a net-metering agreement where we are compensated for the power we produce at the same rate as we pay for electricity. During the first full year of operation our PV system produced 4,700 kilowatt-hours, which was 43% of our total usage of 11,100 kWh.

The PV system includes the following components:
+ 16 Kyocera 170 watt modules for a total output of 2.7 kW
+ Wattsun dual axis tracker system (the system follows the sun morning until night)
+ SMA Sunny Boy 2500 inverter/controller (converts DC voltage to AC for the grid)
+ Concrete foundation (5 yds with rebar), steel post & framework
+ Disconnect switches, wires, conduit, and other miscellaneous electrical items

Our system produces between 200-600 volts (DC current) when the sun shines. It is facing east when the sun rises and follows the sun all day so it is facing west when the sun goes down. The DC current comes into the basement, goes through a disconnect switch and into the Sunny Boy inverter/controller. This device changes the DC current into AC current and controls how the power goes out into the grid. The current goes outside through a disconnect switch, back through our main breaker panel, and then out through the meter to the grid. The best days are when we are not using much power and the meter is actually going backward!

We worked with Light Energy Systems of Madison (now Full Spectrum Solar) to design the system and to provide the parts and some of the labor.

The total cost of the system was about $25,000, but we received a Focus on Energy grant of $8,700 and a Federal Tax Credit of $2,000, so out out-of-pocket costs were about $14,000.

Solar Photovoltaic Electric System # 2
In 2009 we installed our second PV system. We took advantage of a special program from Alliant Energy where we have contracted for 10 years to sell all of the power produced by the system for 25 cents per kWh. It did require us to install a new meter pedestal, at a cost of $1,100 so that the electricity from the new system could be metered separately. We also have to pay about 41 cents/day for the new meter charge, as well as sign up for the Alliant Second Nature program (where we pay a small premium for our energy purchased, which will be from renewable sources). Our total cost for the system was $31,168, and we did some of the work ourselves (digging, concrete, trenching, wire, etc). We will get a 25% Focus on Energy grant of about $7,800 and a 30% Federal tax credit in 2010 of about $9,300. Therefore, our out of pocket costs will be about $14,000. This system has the potential to produce about an 11% annual rate of return.

We purchased the main part of the system from DH Solar. Their system uses a tracking system that they adapted from their experience with commercial satellite tracking systems. The system has 16 Suncast PV panels, each of which is rated at 210 watts, or a total of 3.36 kW. The inverter is a SMA Sunny Boy 3000US.

Barn Workshop Hot Air Collector System
In 2008 we designed, built and installed a hot air collector system on the south side of the old milkhouse. The collector was made from tempered glass, aluminum expandable tubes, painted black, and solid foil-faced insulation. The 6 outlet and inlet piping contains a bi-metallic sensor/control relay and a small in-duct fan to pipe the heat into the barn workshop. The total cost of this system was about $600. A woodstove in the milk house provides backup heat on cloudy days, which is piped with the same piping system into the barn. This is a trial and error system. It looks like we might have to reposition the system to more directly face south to maximize the heat output.