info@truenorthpower.com
A Publication of the FREE Wind Press - May be re-printed for personal use only
Copyright (C) 2007 TRUE-NORTH Power Systems
For commercial or non-profit publication contact TRUE-NORTH Power Systems
Lion's Head ON N0H 1W0 - (519) 793-3290
A Publication of the FREE Wind Press - May be re-printed for personal use only
Copyright (C) 2007 TRUE-NORTH Power Systems
For commercial or non-profit publication contact TRUE-NORTH Power Systems
Lion's Head ON N0H 1W0 - (519) 793-3290
Issue 5:2 Headlines: March 2007
Wind Controllers DIFFERENT than Solar Controllers
Solar installations have dominated the personal renewable energy markets since the 70s, even though they are more expensive per watt installed and produced often. this is largely because they are easy to install (they are less obtrusive than a tower/turbine and rarely any objection), don't take much room, have no moving parts and just sit there and work. As a result, installers are familiar with how to hook them up and their controller technology is pretty standard. Wind however is different and has far fewer installations, and fewer installers are willing to service and support them. When solar owners and installers do install wind they often assume that they are controlling the same "renewable energy" and make assumptions that get them into trouble.
Wind controllers are different because the power they generate in far more dynamic. It changes with every gust and millisecond by millisecond the power can go from 0 to several hundred watts and back. When you look at the ammeter of an operating turbine your are only seeing the peaks generally, and what looks like a mildly bouncing needle is actually thousands of power spikes that are too fast to follow. Here's an example of just 2 seconds of power. What you are seeing are the individual pulses of DC power coming from the turbine, that the controller needs to handle. The millivolts measured across a shunt can be directly related to the current flowing in that wire as they flow on the positive wire going to the battery. . . in this case about 12mv = 12Amps or about 300W at 15mph wind. . .and this is in a steady light wind. Under high wind gusty conditions . . well just imagine.
[missing image]
A solar controller is not designed to control such dynamic power, and batteries generally don't like to be hit with such powerful jolts of energy. They can't respond quickly enough and the extra resistance they "feel" can be hard on the turbine. With a solar controller it's different. The sun comes uuuuuuup and the sun goes dooowwwn. Sometimes a cloud goes byyyyyyyy and then it's gone a few minutes later. For a turbine though, each gust may last only a few seconds and during those few seconds the turbine my respond quickly (as lightweight low inertia turbines do) or more slowly (as the heavier high inertia machines take more time). All turbine's power is changing all the time so you need a controller that can deal with the dynamics.
While a solar controller CAN handle the power from a turbine it won't do it very well and likewise a turbine controller and be used with solar but not as efficiently as a proper MPPT (Maximum Power Point Tracking) solar controller. My point here is if someone tells you they can do both in one ask them to describe the "two" controllers they have in that box . . . because if they are doing both type of power with the same circuits they don't understand the power they are managing.
Solar installations have dominated the personal renewable energy markets since the 70s, even though they are more expensive per watt installed and produced often. this is largely because they are easy to install (they are less obtrusive than a tower/turbine and rarely any objection), don't take much room, have no moving parts and just sit there and work. As a result, installers are familiar with how to hook them up and their controller technology is pretty standard. Wind however is different and has far fewer installations, and fewer installers are willing to service and support them. When solar owners and installers do install wind they often assume that they are controlling the same "renewable energy" and make assumptions that get them into trouble.
Wind controllers are different because the power they generate in far more dynamic. It changes with every gust and millisecond by millisecond the power can go from 0 to several hundred watts and back. When you look at the ammeter of an operating turbine your are only seeing the peaks generally, and what looks like a mildly bouncing needle is actually thousands of power spikes that are too fast to follow. Here's an example of just 2 seconds of power. What you are seeing are the individual pulses of DC power coming from the turbine, that the controller needs to handle. The millivolts measured across a shunt can be directly related to the current flowing in that wire as they flow on the positive wire going to the battery. . . in this case about 12mv = 12Amps or about 300W at 15mph wind. . .and this is in a steady light wind. Under high wind gusty conditions . . well just imagine.
[missing image]
A solar controller is not designed to control such dynamic power, and batteries generally don't like to be hit with such powerful jolts of energy. They can't respond quickly enough and the extra resistance they "feel" can be hard on the turbine. With a solar controller it's different. The sun comes uuuuuuup and the sun goes dooowwwn. Sometimes a cloud goes byyyyyyyy and then it's gone a few minutes later. For a turbine though, each gust may last only a few seconds and during those few seconds the turbine my respond quickly (as lightweight low inertia turbines do) or more slowly (as the heavier high inertia machines take more time). All turbine's power is changing all the time so you need a controller that can deal with the dynamics.
While a solar controller CAN handle the power from a turbine it won't do it very well and likewise a turbine controller and be used with solar but not as efficiently as a proper MPPT (Maximum Power Point Tracking) solar controller. My point here is if someone tells you they can do both in one ask them to describe the "two" controllers they have in that box . . . because if they are doing both type of power with the same circuits they don't understand the power they are managing.
A Subtle Reality for Renewables in Ontario
Everyone is touting the Standard Offer Contract or the Net Metering abilities of private citizens in generating their own power. You can even get your provincial sales tax back (8%) on any renewable energy system components you buy. Wind farms are springing up . . more are planned and "renewables news" seems to be on every second news cast. Conferences abound on how to finance RE projects, where to invest in ethanol or bio-gas or wind farms. Climate change is on everyone's lips from Al Gore to the fifth grade science projects. This all sounds good and there ARE real projects underway that will help the green house gases and the planet . . . but you know what? . . . there is an underlying current of resistance here in Ontario that just won't go away.
I've studied this "intertia" for a few years now and it recently occurred to me that that's all it is INERTIA and the FEAR of CHANGE. . . the way we make and distribute power today is the same way we've done it for decades . . almost a hundred years in fact . . . and so much inertia is hard to change. . . So hard in fact that we are loath to even acknowledge the fear in changing the direction our ship is taking us . . . let alone the idea that we are on a very big cruise ship and heading into deep and uncharted waters towards a major if not "perfect" storm. Huge sums of money are at stake in the electrical power business and if they get dissipated on all these new "unproven" initiatives then the "proven" but old style mega projects may not be fundable! There is no formal conspiracy I'd wager, just the desire to keep our existing jobs and keep doing what we know about . . . but the effect is the same and you can see it when you put a few facts together.
Yes the European landscape has changed. Turbines and solar are everywhere. I've got news for you. . the energy/climate equation has changed. . . and we need to change with it or die with our head in the sand . . . or where ever our heads are.
What I'm pointing out here is there is a subtle or at least unacknowledged link between big project power inertia (the nuclear/fossil fuels game) and the inhibited approach Ontario and even local legislatures have with renewable energy. Wind and solar is clearly CLEAN . . good for the environment and clearly RENEWABLE. The longer we delay encouraging alternate, distributed energy the more we become MORE dependent on fossil fuels rather than less. If we commit too much money to renewables first . . . before we are financially married the next mega project . . there might not be enough money for the "Centralized Power Solution" . . . or maybe that's the subtle reality.
Everyone is touting the Standard Offer Contract or the Net Metering abilities of private citizens in generating their own power. You can even get your provincial sales tax back (8%) on any renewable energy system components you buy. Wind farms are springing up . . more are planned and "renewables news" seems to be on every second news cast. Conferences abound on how to finance RE projects, where to invest in ethanol or bio-gas or wind farms. Climate change is on everyone's lips from Al Gore to the fifth grade science projects. This all sounds good and there ARE real projects underway that will help the green house gases and the planet . . . but you know what? . . . there is an underlying current of resistance here in Ontario that just won't go away.
I've studied this "intertia" for a few years now and it recently occurred to me that that's all it is INERTIA and the FEAR of CHANGE. . . the way we make and distribute power today is the same way we've done it for decades . . almost a hundred years in fact . . . and so much inertia is hard to change. . . So hard in fact that we are loath to even acknowledge the fear in changing the direction our ship is taking us . . . let alone the idea that we are on a very big cruise ship and heading into deep and uncharted waters towards a major if not "perfect" storm. Huge sums of money are at stake in the electrical power business and if they get dissipated on all these new "unproven" initiatives then the "proven" but old style mega projects may not be fundable! There is no formal conspiracy I'd wager, just the desire to keep our existing jobs and keep doing what we know about . . . but the effect is the same and you can see it when you put a few facts together.
- 60 MW offshore wind farm is delayed and back examining the "environmental impact" just one week AFTER the Danish Energy Authority in concert with the Danish Forest and Nature Agency publishes an 8 year "Offshore wind impact study" with commentary from the International Advisory Panel of Experts on Marine Ecology that details "overwhelmingly positive findings", noting that there is a net benefit UNDER the surface and a NEUTRAL impact above the surface.
- A similar 100+MW windfarm is stalled on the lake Huron coast pending some similar study and zoning issues or whatever.
- A few disgruntled citizens in Blue Mountain don't want ANY change and have hired legal help to "STOP THE WIND" anywhere in Grey Highlands. They've gone beyond NIMBY (not in my back yard) . . . they've gone BANANA (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything). . . so far they've succeeded in stalling at least two attempts to bring clean renewable energy to the region.
- Ontario Legislature quickly passes legislation in 2006 that "fast tracks" a nuclear building project worth "billions" by exempting it from full environmental study.
- Tiny Township in Simcoe County is typical of many municipal planners who are passing new by-laws that inhibit change . . that have the net effect of discouraging rather than encouraging the public from generating their own distributed renewable power. (see the story below in the US)
Yes the European landscape has changed. Turbines and solar are everywhere. I've got news for you. . the energy/climate equation has changed. . . and we need to change with it or die with our head in the sand . . . or where ever our heads are.
What I'm pointing out here is there is a subtle or at least unacknowledged link between big project power inertia (the nuclear/fossil fuels game) and the inhibited approach Ontario and even local legislatures have with renewable energy. Wind and solar is clearly CLEAN . . good for the environment and clearly RENEWABLE. The longer we delay encouraging alternate, distributed energy the more we become MORE dependent on fossil fuels rather than less. If we commit too much money to renewables first . . . before we are financially married the next mega project . . there might not be enough money for the "Centralized Power Solution" . . . or maybe that's the subtle reality.
Tower Dispute with the Township
Here's an example of the resistance to change that is keeping us from encouraging renewable distributed power. Joe O'lall attended our weekend workshop and got inspired. He went home and installed a small wind turbine at his home in Pennsylvania . . his neighbours thought it was great and want to do the same . . but the township had a problem. He's been through the municipal planning system trying to work things out. He's been in the papers and he's well known now in the county. Last week he won a small victory for personal power. A judge ruled the township objections and enforcement notice were "illegal".
Here's the story in his own words . . . maybe some of you can relate.
Here is the link to the newspaper story about it http://www.wnep.com/Global/story.asp?S=5893480
I won the appeal for the enforcement notice as it was legally invalid (JAN 2007). The township wanted me to file for a variance. I went along with this as per their advise to cure the problem.
The issue with variances is that one must meet the strict 5 point criteria of which the most difficult is "hardship the land imposes on the homeowner" and "reasonable use of property". I did not see eye to eye with the township on how this could resolve the problem and this is why I didn't apply for the variance back in September 2006. I applied for a variance in JAN 2007 and was denied in FEB 2007.
The township ordinance states that a structure under one hundred square feet needs no permit but must comply with the setbacks. The township is treating my concrete piers in the ground as a "structure". As a result, it has to comply with the accessory setback of 10ft. They are also taking my wind turbine and tower to be more that 100 square feet.
Definition of SETBACK - the required distance between structures and any lot line. Setbacks will exclude certain projections such as uncovered walkways and bay windows.
Accessory setback - 10ft
Definition of STRUCTURE - An man-made object having a stationary location on, below or in land or water, whether or not affixed to the land. Any structure shall be subject to the principal or accessory setbacks of this ordinance, as applicable, unless specifically exempted or unless a specific setback has been established for that particular type of structure by this ordinance. For the purposes of this ordinance, wells and septic systems shall not be considered structures and shall not be subject to the minimum zoning setback requirements.
My position on the definition of setback is that it is vague. It does not provide clarity on HOW the distance is to be MEASURED. By this I mean, the minimum distance measured in a straight line on a horizontal plane perpendicular to the lot line. Ordinances of other townships make this very clear.
The REQUIRED distance is NOT the MINIMUM distance!!
Also WHERE on the structure are measurement to be taken?
The Pennsylvania Municipal Planning Code (MPC) 603.1 states that - In interpreting that language of the ordinance to determine the extent of the restriction upon the use of property, the language shall be interpreted, where doubt exists as to the intended meaning of the language written and enacted by the governing body, in favor of the property owner and against any implied extension of the restriction.
So basically if they are not clear on how to measure the setback distance, why are they measuring it to the concrete anchors? It should be to the base of the tower.
I now have a case before a judge (not a hearing board!!) on erecting a windmill without obtaining a permit.(MARCH 2007)
I feel that I would have a better chance proving my case before a judge.....will keep you posted.
Here's an example of the resistance to change that is keeping us from encouraging renewable distributed power. Joe O'lall attended our weekend workshop and got inspired. He went home and installed a small wind turbine at his home in Pennsylvania . . his neighbours thought it was great and want to do the same . . but the township had a problem. He's been through the municipal planning system trying to work things out. He's been in the papers and he's well known now in the county. Last week he won a small victory for personal power. A judge ruled the township objections and enforcement notice were "illegal".
Here's the story in his own words . . . maybe some of you can relate.
Here is the link to the newspaper story about it http://www.wnep.com/Global/story.asp?S=5893480
I won the appeal for the enforcement notice as it was legally invalid (JAN 2007). The township wanted me to file for a variance. I went along with this as per their advise to cure the problem.
The issue with variances is that one must meet the strict 5 point criteria of which the most difficult is "hardship the land imposes on the homeowner" and "reasonable use of property". I did not see eye to eye with the township on how this could resolve the problem and this is why I didn't apply for the variance back in September 2006. I applied for a variance in JAN 2007 and was denied in FEB 2007.
The township ordinance states that a structure under one hundred square feet needs no permit but must comply with the setbacks. The township is treating my concrete piers in the ground as a "structure". As a result, it has to comply with the accessory setback of 10ft. They are also taking my wind turbine and tower to be more that 100 square feet.
Definition of SETBACK - the required distance between structures and any lot line. Setbacks will exclude certain projections such as uncovered walkways and bay windows.
Accessory setback - 10ft
Definition of STRUCTURE - An man-made object having a stationary location on, below or in land or water, whether or not affixed to the land. Any structure shall be subject to the principal or accessory setbacks of this ordinance, as applicable, unless specifically exempted or unless a specific setback has been established for that particular type of structure by this ordinance. For the purposes of this ordinance, wells and septic systems shall not be considered structures and shall not be subject to the minimum zoning setback requirements.
My position on the definition of setback is that it is vague. It does not provide clarity on HOW the distance is to be MEASURED. By this I mean, the minimum distance measured in a straight line on a horizontal plane perpendicular to the lot line. Ordinances of other townships make this very clear.
The REQUIRED distance is NOT the MINIMUM distance!!
Also WHERE on the structure are measurement to be taken?
The Pennsylvania Municipal Planning Code (MPC) 603.1 states that - In interpreting that language of the ordinance to determine the extent of the restriction upon the use of property, the language shall be interpreted, where doubt exists as to the intended meaning of the language written and enacted by the governing body, in favor of the property owner and against any implied extension of the restriction.
So basically if they are not clear on how to measure the setback distance, why are they measuring it to the concrete anchors? It should be to the base of the tower.
I now have a case before a judge (not a hearing board!!) on erecting a windmill without obtaining a permit.(MARCH 2007)
I feel that I would have a better chance proving my case before a judge.....will keep you posted.
Training in the Dominican Republic
When Magnum Teknologies of Miami opened an office in Dominican they sold batteries inverters, and solar and the wind turbines. Over the years they sold a lot of systems and recently the demand has increased substantially. . . so this January when they asked me to come down and train their people on LAKOTA and hybrid solar installation I thought hmmmm . . . minus 20 and horizontal snow here or palm trees and 80 degrees there? . .. what should I do?
Tony Bombino owns Magnum and after a couple of years of letting others run his business got board and decided it was time to jump back in the saddle. Tony spent a number of years selling batteries and Trace inverters all over Caribbean, Mexico, Central and South America, eventually selling nearly half of their total production. When he set up Magnum in Miami however, he began using those contacts to develop a sizable business in Dominican where he will soon expand into a new facility with lots more room. A poor electrical infrastructure and frequent power outages have turned this vacation paradise into a hot spot for renewables. Many homes already has some sort of small battery pack or inverter. In fact Trace (now Xantrex) originally built their 2kW modified sine wave inverters there and labeled them DR as opposed to SW for sine wave. The DR stood for Dominican Republic in an many areas it's still same a saying with "Modified Sine Wave".
Here are a couple of photos from the training . . check out the rest of them under the Course Photo Album or the Magnum Dominican Photo Album just uploaded .
When Magnum Teknologies of Miami opened an office in Dominican they sold batteries inverters, and solar and the wind turbines. Over the years they sold a lot of systems and recently the demand has increased substantially. . . so this January when they asked me to come down and train their people on LAKOTA and hybrid solar installation I thought hmmmm . . . minus 20 and horizontal snow here or palm trees and 80 degrees there? . .. what should I do?
Tony Bombino owns Magnum and after a couple of years of letting others run his business got board and decided it was time to jump back in the saddle. Tony spent a number of years selling batteries and Trace inverters all over Caribbean, Mexico, Central and South America, eventually selling nearly half of their total production. When he set up Magnum in Miami however, he began using those contacts to develop a sizable business in Dominican where he will soon expand into a new facility with lots more room. A poor electrical infrastructure and frequent power outages have turned this vacation paradise into a hot spot for renewables. Many homes already has some sort of small battery pack or inverter. In fact Trace (now Xantrex) originally built their 2kW modified sine wave inverters there and labeled them DR as opposed to SW for sine wave. The DR stood for Dominican Republic in an many areas it's still same a saying with "Modified Sine Wave".
Here are a couple of photos from the training . . check out the rest of them under the Course Photo Album or the Magnum Dominican Photo Album just uploaded .
Roof Tower fun in Dominican?
Dominicans like to put a 50-60ft tower right on their roof and they can because unlike Canadian timber frame homes with peaked roofs and gables . . . their roofs are often flat and the structure made of steel reinforced concrete. I had a great time for a week in February talking to and working with Tony and these installers. Here are a couple experienced tower guys in Dominican . . they climb these kinds of towers every day and seem quite at ease up there. I climbed this one myself for a look see and I didn't stay very long. I prefer the the view from the level of the second photo. . . now that's a place where I could see doing a lot of installs. . . . call Magnum!
Dominicans like to put a 50-60ft tower right on their roof and they can because unlike Canadian timber frame homes with peaked roofs and gables . . . their roofs are often flat and the structure made of steel reinforced concrete. I had a great time for a week in February talking to and working with Tony and these installers. Here are a couple experienced tower guys in Dominican . . they climb these kinds of towers every day and seem quite at ease up there. I climbed this one myself for a look see and I didn't stay very long. I prefer the the view from the level of the second photo. . . now that's a place where I could see doing a lot of installs. . . . call Magnum!