Solar powered A/C

[kazetsukai]

Originally Posted by dzl_

John might come across as overly negative here, but the argument he is making, is logical and worth stating, and for the most part he is the only person in this thread stating it.

And most importantly John is correct =) and we all know it!

Originally Posted by dzl_

I just wanted to stand up for John, as I think he is adding a lot of value to this thread (as are most of you). I've disagreed with John on a number of issues, and think that sometimes he can be a little overly dogmatic, but I also usually see the logic of his position even when I disagree with him, and value his opinion.

My thoughts exactly.

I think its important to add that the "not for beginners" is not saying that the-rest-of-us-are-advanced-therefore-better-than-you, either- I paid less for the Wh and I got less capabilities for it. LPO is the better chemistry by virtue of voltage curve alone even, I just don't think its as bulletproof as some of its proponents claim. They will blow up all the same if you abuse them and I really do wonder if the myriad of super-simplified, $$$$, 4+ battery parallel 12V LPO banks with "internal BMSes" we see out there will last. I have my doubts... especially if one doesn't monitor their system.

Originally Posted by dzl_

And on a semi-related note, I'm very impressed with some of your systems! Kazetsukai, I'm looking at you specifically, and love seeing someone using the SBMS0, I'd love to learn more about how your system is configured.

I am pretty constantly humbled by new discovery through this whole process, the SBMS0 integration is no exception. I think I have something close to 6.4 kWh of effective capacity if I charge these like I want them to last, which is just not going to do it for off grid heat and A/C.

I'll be rebuilding my bank sometime this year to be 7S or 8S using cells you can tie together in any configuration. It'll probably be LPO but an alternative would be the leaf batteries. The Teslas just will not scale in their native configurations the way I want them to, so they'll be repurposed to other applications.

[john61ct]

I have been using solar, including living off grid full time for years at a time with no genset either since the 80's.

And am as tree-hugger greenie as you can get, at least wrt idealism.

But noobs without a clue thinking they can just move their US-style crazy-wasteful electrical mod con appliances over to a solar-only, or even "mostly solar"

do not need encouragement, except to learn more about the technology so they become realistic.

If your motivation is to truly "be green" then you should see aircon as an immoral abomination, and either acclimate your body to the heat, or move your habitat to somewhere more comfortable.

If your motivation is economic, really the same applies, aircon is really only affordable for hundreds of hours per month, on very cheap (stupidly immorally and unsustainably cheap) mains electricity.

If you are wealthy, and want a luxury glamping experience then fine go for it, but if you just want to "appear green" for PR purposes you won't be getting any points from me.

[kazetsukai]

Originally Posted by john61ct

on very cheap (stupidly immorally and unsustainably cheap) mains electricity.

I don't see how energy can be "stupidly" or "immorally" cheap. What it comes down to is, the means by which most people get their energy isn't ideal for the environment. Folks like you and I want to generate energy a better way- and that way is currently more expensive.

Arbitrarily making mains energy more expensive wont fix this problem. Engineering effort must be spent to reduce the costs of the solutions we prefer.

Originally Posted by john61ct

If you are wealthy, and want a luxury glamping experience then fine go for it, but if you just want to "appear green" for PR purposes you won't be getting any points from me.

Most "greenies" I know are, by human historical standards, absurdly wealthy. For many around the world mere access to energy is a problem and here you or I am being particularly picky about what kind of energy we want to consume- Your or my concern for the environment is a luxury of a wealthy society.

Originally Posted by john61ct

But noobs without a clue thinking they can just move their US-style crazy-wasteful electrical mod con appliances over to a solar-only, or even "mostly solar"

The day is coming where this will be somewhat easy- then honestly who cares? Batteries _will_ increase in capacity by several orders of magnitude in the next 50 years. Even my PV array will eventually look like

We're pioneers, you being an early pioneer. Eventually this will become mainstream and then we'll be bickering over which panels are ethically produced. Not that that's a bad thing...

[banman]

Originally Posted by kazetsukai

I don't see how energy can be "stupidly" or "immorally" cheap. What it comes down to is, the means by which most people get their energy isn't ideal for the environment. Folks like you and I want to generate energy a better way- and that way is currently more expensive.

Arbitrarily making mains energy more expensive wont fix this problem. Engineering effort must be spent to reduce the costs of the solutions we prefer.

Most "greenies" I know are, by human historical standards, absurdly wealthy. For many around the world mere access to energy is a problem and here you or I am being particularly picky about what kind of energy we want to consume- Your or my concern for the environment is a luxury of a wealthy society.

"I don't see how energy can be "stupidly" or "immorally" cheap. "
Within the USA, oh yes... The stupid and immoral are value judgments against all the negative externalities the power companies don't actually pay for. The cost of polluted air and water from coal and oil for example aren't born by the producers of coal and oil...

Your notion of environmental concern being only a "luxury of the wealthy" is not only completely wrong, it is grossly insulting to all the decent folks who are working hard to be sustainable in what you would describe as third world countries as well as plenty of grass roots efforts in the US to promote local sustainability...

[john61ct]

Yes, to the extent the externalities aren't brought into pricing structure, of course non-renewable energy cheaply priced is immoral.

But then there are ethical problems with almost everything we buy that's been commodified by capitalism, the whole point of the system is separating us as consumers from the factors involved in production and distribution.

Research the coffee supply chain, that's been a ****-show from the beginning, not much better these days.

[sproutroot]

Originally Posted by banman

Your notion of environmental concern being only a "luxury of the wealthy" is not only completely wrong, it is grossly insulting to all the decent folks who are working hard to be sustainable in what you would describe as third world countries as well as plenty of grass roots efforts in the US to promote local sustainability...

We are a grass roots effort. This conversation right here. Directly comparable to any other American small scale solar movement. We are privileged. Ridiculously privileged. Most of us could put in adequate solar installations by shopping on facebook marketplace. That might be "insulting" to people in destitute societies who have to work really hard to get access to any type of solar, but that's not kazetsukai's fault.

[kazetsukai]

Originally Posted by banman

Within the USA, oh yes... The stupid and immoral are value judgments against all the negative externalities the power companies don't actually pay for. The cost of polluted air and water from coal and oil for example aren't born by the producers of coal and oil...

This is a perfectly valid line of reasoning, I don't know why you need to then sabotage/undermine this reasoning with such ridiculous sanctimony later:

Originally Posted by banman

Your notion of environmental concern being only a "luxury of the wealthy" is not only completely wrong, it is grossly insulting to all the decent folks who are working hard to be sustainable in what you would describe as third world countries as well as plenty of grass roots efforts in the US to promote local sustainability...

Spare me, dude. You know exactly what I'm saying when I say environmental _energy_ concerns are a luxury of wealthy societies, there is a solid connection between the two no matter how much you may try to ignore it.

Different areas of the globe are at different levels of advancement in terms of society and technology, that is a hard fact we are going to have to grapple with. For instance, the electric car will replace ICE in different parts of the world at different times. It is plenty likely what you call "third world" (you used the term, not me) countries will need ICE to achieve the levels of production we have, and if you're going to intervene and say "you can't have that", when our societies had the benefit of such, that itself introduces moral dilemmas you cannot escape from.

And for crying out loud, your average Tesla or Leaf or whatever costs double, triple, or quaduple that of an equivalent ICE car. The people I know that own these vehicles are absurdly rich by world standards, without exception. You can be passionate and reasonable, and try to reach hearts and minds, or you can be sanctimonious.

Originally Posted by john61ct

Yes, to the extent the externalities aren't brought into pricing structure, of course non-renewable energy cheaply priced is immoral.

Purely academic curiosity here: How does one objectively quantify and value those externalities? Who owns that and who is owed compensation for the production of externalities? What kind of compensation is acceptable?

Originally Posted by john61ct

the whole point of the system is separating us as consumers from the factors involved in production and distribution.

I'm not sure what you're saying as to "the whole point of the system", but I guess more importantly I don't understand how can one not be separated from "the factors involved in production and distribution". Seems like for me, for the average consumer to be involved they'd have to be there in the factory or the distribution hub. The abstraction seems to me to be a feature, not a bug- you can't cram all of the engineering required to make and ship pencils into one, single human being- it is because of the division of labor and concerns people are able to focus and advance.

Unless the idea is, forego these things, agrarian society is the way forward, etc, I'm missing some bigger message here, it feels. What is the ideal and how do we get there?

Originally Posted by john61ct

Research the coffee supply chain, that's been a ****-show from the beginning, not much better these days.

Could you at least give me a point of reference to start with here? Perhaps some link or literature.

[sproutroot]

I just typed a long response that had nothing to do with solar or A/C, so all I have to say is:

Originally Posted by kazetsukai

agrarian society is the way forward

count me in for that!

[john61ct]

https://theoutline.com/post/8936/cof...arbucks-brazil

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/m...n-economy.html

https://www.eater.com/2016/6/8/11883828/

[john61ct]

Originally Posted by kazetsukai

You know exactly what I'm saying when I say environmental _energy_ concerns are a luxury of wealthy societies, there is a solid connection between the two no matter how much you may try to ignore it.

Different areas of the globe are at different levels of advancement in terms of society and technology, that is a hard fact we are going to have to grapple with.

You see, colonialism and exploitative capitalism are water to your fishiness, you just assume material comfort and technological advancement are "progress"

and that saving our ecosystems is somehow optional, or can be procrastinated.

Instead, many realize that the survival of our species is very much under threat, not later but now, and that all the first-world doodads are the problem not a solution

and believe me the poorest of the poor are much more aware of this than any wealthy westerners thinking a Tesla is part of the solutions.

[kazetsukai]

Originally Posted by john61ct

https://theoutline.com/post/8936/cof...arbucks-brazil

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/08/m...n-economy.html

https://www.eater.com/2016/6/8/11883828/

I wonder if there are any analogues to coffee one could draw similar comparisons to. Lot of reading to do here, thanks for the links.

Originally Posted by john61ct

You see, colonialism and exploitative capitalism are water to your fishiness, you just assume material comfort and technological advancement are "progress"

I would take similar objection to some other ideas as to what "progress" might be- but more importantly, I'll state for what it is worth that this is false. I'm no fan of consumerism. And we're not on a one way track towards technological advancement- what we've seen from 1800s-present seem more like an anomaly than a long running trend.

Material wealth doesn't necessarily lead to human happiness, in fact examples to the contrary are a dime a dozen. For any differences we may have, I believe we have more in common than not. And I appreciate your response.

[banman]

Originally Posted by kazetsukai

This is a perfectly valid line of reasoning, I don't know why you need to then sabotage/undermine this reasoning with such ridiculous sanctimony later:

Spare me, dude. You know exactly what I'm saying when I say environmental _energy_ concerns are a luxury of wealthy societies, there is a solid connection between the two no matter how much you may try to ignore it.
No honestly I didn't, hence my reaction...

Different areas of the globe are at different levels of advancement in terms of society and technology, that is a hard fact we are going to have to grapple with. For instance, the electric car will replace ICE in different parts of the world at different times. It is plenty likely what you call "third world" (you used the term, not me) countries will need ICE to achieve the levels of production we have, and if you're going to intervene and say "you can't have that", when our societies had the benefit of such, that itself introduces moral dilemmas you cannot escape from.
Mostly agree with this...

SNIP...

Purely academic curiosity here: How does one objectively quantify and value those externalities? Who owns that and who is owed compensation for the production of externalities? What kind of compensation is acceptable?

SNIP...

Could you at least give me a point of reference to start with here? Perhaps some link or literature.

And you didn't ask me but I'll add to what you asked:
The idea of Natural Resource Economics -- how do you value clean air? clean water? what is a National Park worth?
We have a good idea of what it costs (in $$) to build a water treatment plant; to filter air. You can calculate the cost to real estate how much extra building maintenance is required due to acid rain. These are tangible things...
How many acre feet of water is cleaned by 1000 acres of wetland can then be calculated by knowing what it costs to build and operate a water treatment plant to filter the same quantity of water. (to make a simple example)

By that logic you can now calculate the additional cost of burning coal by factoring in the real cost of polluted watersheds, and polluted air, etc.
The mining company doesn't pay for watershed damage; the power generator doesn't pay for acid rain, asthma, etc.
And you and I as consumers don't pay per kilowatt what it actually cost society to bring the power to our door.

Sorry for my part in the disruption of this thread.

[john61ct]

Originally Posted by kazetsukai

I wonder if there are any analogues to coffee one could draw similar comparisons to.

Sugar, cotton, tobacco historically.

Really the whole history of mercantilism industrialization and its evolution into imperialism / colonialism.

All of which trends have never stopped or become (much) more just in modern times.

[Pigeoneer]

Originally Posted by nanoplane

I'm putting solar and mini split in my bus conversion right now..

I have 20 x 100W, flexible panels on the roof (about $150 each).
2 x midnite solar charge controllers (about $500) each
4 x 200AH AGM batteries (about $350) each.
1 x 3kW AIMS inverter / charger (about $800)
plus about $1k of wire and fuses and breakers and switches..

I'm rather ambitious...
I'm installing a 9K BTU inverter mini split system that flat out uses about 800W.

my refrigerator uses only 70W when it runs.. I expect overall, probably average 1/2 that on a daily basis.

Cooking consists of an induction cooktop (2KW max) and an inverter Microwave.

Haven't got everything hooked up yet, but...

Sorry to revive an old thread, but my current design is looking very similar to yours. What has your experience been with this set-up? (I have 2,200w solar, 800ah AGM, 3,000watt inverter, 9k BTU mini)

[kazetsukai]

Originally Posted by Pigeoneer

Sorry to revive an old thread, but my current design is looking very similar to yours. What has your experience been with this set-up? (I have 2,200w solar, 800ah AGM, 3,000watt inverter, 9k BTU mini)

My setup is a little different:

• 3000W Solar - I use 10x 300W panels mounted flat.
• 840Ah 48V LiFEPO4 (Equivalent to 3360 Ah @ 12V)
• 6000W Genetry Solar inverter with charge input.

With a single 9000 BTU mini split from InnovAir.

During sunny days, the system will keep up with 24/7 Split AC. Overcast however will deplete the batteries in about 5 days. No input, 2-3 days. Split draw varies from 350W to 1120W, with an average of around 700W I'd say (unscientific estimate).

12V 800Ah, it is possible to get you through the night I'd say, but if it is hot outside you will be running it very close. Note if your system is rated 800Ah, only around half of that is actually usable with AGM chemistry. Do not deplete below 50% if you want the batteries to last.

Even if Split AC is all you are running, 2200W will not likely be able to recharge what you lost overnight to full during the day with peak sun. If you are going to need air conditioning a lot, you need more generation. More panels, or since you run 12V, look at perhaps running a generator to recharge the batteries with some fast AC-DC chargers. Unlike just running with a generator, your battery bank will allow you to run the generator intermittently to recharge rather than the entire time you need electricity.

However if you are just running AC during peak sun, or infrequently, it should work fairly well.

One other thing I'd offer is that in my rig at least (38'), a single 9000 isn't enough to cool the whole rig. I'm installing a second split in the rear for this reason, and I expect my electrical needs to jump somewhere between 150%-200% when they're going full tilt.

Hope that helps.