Standalone 100% Buildings: The Site

[Remundo]

complicated, it means the opposite of simple,

a simple stand-alone building?
1) very well insulated, well exposed
2) photovoltaic + some batteries for storage
3) logs + chimney for winter cold peaks

[yves35]

Hello,

complicated, it means the opposite of simple,

a simple stand-alone building?
1) very well insulated, well exposed
2) photovoltaic + some batteries for storage
3) logs + chimney for winter cold peaks

yes except for point 2. The effectiveness of the advertising hype was such that it became reflex to assimilate the PV to autonomy, ecology, good thinking etc ... (yes, I forget the financial profitability ...) We must remember the price of a PV installation in the "good years" from 18000 to 20000 euros. For this price it is possible to make a thermal renovation of very good quality. Again this price of 18000-20000 euros does not take into account the buyback commitments over 20 years ....

When you see a subsidized PV installation on a roof, you can convert to suppressed utility stations.

Clearly our problem is not the lack of electricity

When I see a PV field, I want to take out my revolver (as a famous humorist said )

yves

[yaccard]

Hello
For me autonomy, it is a contracted word, it would have to be said autonomy compared to fossil energies and uranium ore, by replacing this dependence by a link of dependence compared to the solar energy which we use for 5 billion d 'years and that will last as much.
But it's easier to say autonomy.
It is a matter of common sense since fossil fuels will run out as well as uranium ore, the only question being "when exactly" and I am not talking about the pollution generated.
There are certainly several ways to get there and I expose those that are known to me, you can suggest others, either achievements that are already working, or ideas or projects going in this direction.
Yves

[Remundo]

Hello Yves,

Hello,

complicated, it means the opposite of simple,

a simple stand-alone building?
1) very well insulated, well exposed
2) photovoltaic + some batteries for storage
3) logs + chimney for winter cold peaks

yes except for point 2. The effectiveness of the advertising hype was such that it became reflex to assimilate the PV to autonomy, ecology, good thinking etc ... (yes, I forget the financial profitability ...) We must remember the price of a PV installation in the "good years" from 18000 to 20000 euros. For this price it is possible to make a thermal renovation of very good quality. Again this price of 18000-20000 euros does not take into account the buyback commitments over 20 years ....

You reason as if money fell into a black hole ... The money is still there: it circulated, paid its tax, made work workers who fed their families and paid for their house, it was reinvested elsewhere ...

Same for the CSPE. The money is still in France, and individuals who sell their electricity consume in France ...

When you see a subsidized PV installation on a roof, you can convert to suppressed utility stations.

The famous subsidies of which you speak allowed the emergence of an industrial sector of PV and the current prices of the panels make self-consumption almost profitable.

Clearly our problem is not the lack of electricity

it is especially the lack of CLEAN and INDEPENDENT electricity that is the problem.

When I see a PV field, I want to take out my revolver (as a famous humorist said

)
for all the above reasons, this is not a good idea.

@+

[yves35]

Good evening,

vast debate .. first of all there is no question of pointing to this or that who by idealism made a PV installation (I do not know if this is your case in particular).

We live in a limited world (in the sense of finite) so what I am pointing out is the foreclosure effect it has: you know a lot of "average" French people who have built a PV roof for 20000 euros + 20000 euros of energy renovation? Those who had savings (therefore who know how to count a little) made PV and that's it. Because it was a good financial investment

I do not have the figures at the head of memory there was 9000 euros of tax credit and the guarantee of repurchase over 20 years of approximately 3000Kwh / year at 0.54 euros (kxt edf = 0.045 euros). Which represents over 20 years:
20 X (0.54-0.45) X 3000 = 29700 euros ... and the 9000 euros in tax credits

I apologize for being so close to our money

Who will argue that it was wise to sprinkle this tax gift in the population (in the part that has the means, in fact: you have to be the owner of your roof). Who will argue that EDF was in a worse position to get a good price than the average Beijing (with savings, the Beijing). That EDF did not have the skills to thwart the scams of margoulins (and there was a bunch)

Another aspect of things: to do a given task we generally choose the shortest and most economical way. It is equivalent to producing 1 kWh or substituting 1 kWh for a given service. For an investment of 18000 + 29700 = 48000 euros it will produce say 30 years at 3000kwh or 90000kwh the price per kwh produced is 90000 / 480000 = around 50 cents. A thermal renovation produces cheaper negawatteurs, gives more local work, makes us safer from foreign suppliers.

The beneficiaries in there? There was a French PV company: photowatt. Wiped out by Chinese dumping.

The PV in France is a textbook case of greenwashing

What a mess ... finally I'm too timid with my revolver, it is buckshot it takes

yves

[Remundo]

there is no reason to oppose the thermal renovation and the installation of PV. The 2 are very complementary,

Besides, the profit of one can finance the cost of the other.

At the start of the PV, the rates of return on investment were not that great, around 10 years. Because the panels were very expensive.

Now it's a bit the same (or even it gets bad with 15 year TRIs ...), but the capital investment is considerably lower per kWp installed.

We have decreased by a factor of 10: from 6-7 € / Wp installed in the years 2008-2009, we are currently around 0.6-0.7 € / Wc

and that is also thanks to those who invested at the beginning, that they had equity, or even recourse to credit ...

[yaccard]

Hello
The subject I started is not a subject on photovoltaics!
Photovoltaics has advantages and disadvantages, in particular that of soon being almost exclusively Chinese, which does not specifically go towards autonomy!
Depending on a single supplier is rather risky and I am not talking about the rest since it is not the subject here.
Solar electricity can absolutely be produced with the thermodynamic sector (40 to 50% efficiency for 12 to 15% for PV) as is the case for the Mojave solar power plants (see photo).
Just as electrical production can be done with a combustion engine (in co-generation mode), the fuel cell also has many flaws.
For those who think that cost is an obstacle (but without giving figures), here are some answers.
1) the low cost of investment, like electric heating, often turns out to be the highest cost in the long run!
2) An investment such as that described in the hydrogen solution only makes sense if we start by designing ultra-economical installations (which is already said in the description).
3) The cost of any technical system depends much more on the volume of production than on its technical complexity.
This means that the hydrogen system, if it was produced with the same volumes as conventional boilers, would not cost much more to invest but considerably less to use and ultimately (recycling at the end of life), while being without time limit (if not the life of our planet and its sun).
Maybe also by pooling the technical system for a group of buildings.

Now for those who think the solution would be:
a simple stand-alone building?
1) very well insulated, well exposed
2) photovoltaic + some batteries for storage
3) logs + chimney for winter cold peaks

Well I take my hat off to them, I have a few friends who live like that and they are convinced activists.
Simply put, they have not been emulated much since all these years. (I have been doing solar since 1974)
If you know people who live like this (not connected to networks), I would be happy to present them on my site, even anonymously if they wish.
Yves

[Ahmed]

I would only react on one point (end of the day! ); you write:

3) The cost of any technical system depends much more on the volume of production than on its technical complexity.

This is certainly true in terms of production, but much less in terms of marketing, installation and maintenance. In this case, can we effectively speak of autonomy if we are linked to external contributors, without the possibility of personal control, neither in terms of cost of services, nor in terms of content of interventions?

[Remundo]

Solar electricity can absolutely be produced with the thermodynamic sector (40 to 50% efficiency for 12 to 15% for PV) as is the case for the Mojave solar power plants (see photo).

that's not true ... thermodynamic solar painfully exceeds 20% efficiency (just the steam turbine roughly 33% efficiency), while the most recent PV is also 20% efficiency, without no moving parts, for a lower cost.

It is no coincidence that many thermodynamic solar projects are abandoned.

End of HS

1) very well insulated, well exposed
2) photovoltaic + some batteries for storage
3) logs + chimney for winter cold peaks

This is what my ancestors did in Auvergne, except that the PV did not yet exist ... They were building due south with huge walls (over 1m wide), the back of the house buried in the ground, and wood for the winter ... no need for the hydrogen fuel cell technician!

Then we can discuss the "autonomous" nature of wood, but wood is a form of solar energy storage.

[yaccard]

Hello
I repeat (but apparently it has not been read) that for me, the word "autonomy" is a contraction of "autonomy in relation to fossil fuels and other uranium ores" but certainly not "absolute" autonomy which of elsewhere does not mean anything, since we remain dependent on solar energy at the planetary level.
I have shown real examples that work according to this principle of autonomy, now, no one has provided me with other functional examples that I would gladly add to my site.
PS: the questions of yield are not essential in a system where the primary energy (the sun) is free, it is more the total cost (from the cradle to the grave) which counts and the must be wary of subsidized systems (with obscure logics) because tomorrow they will not be anymore when a building lasts at least a century and even much more with successive renovations.
Yves