For anyone thinking of adding a bit of solar heat to their shop, I've
put up a web page (link below) with monthly maps showing how much
solar energy is delivered to locations in the USA. The data represents
a 30-year average.

If you're not in the USA, you may be able to find that information at
www.nrel.gov

At the bottom of the page there's a link that can be used in
conjunction with the map data to predict the heat output from a
south-facing vertical panel. The program will run under Windows or
MS-DOS (apologies to others; but this is a Windows box).

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SolarEnergy.html

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...
For anyone thinking of adding a bit of solar heat to their shop, I've
put up a web page (link below) with monthly maps showing how much
solar energy is delivered to locations in the USA. The data represents
a 30-year average.

If you're not in the USA, you may be able to find that information at
www.nrel.gov

At the bottom of the page there's a link that can be used in
conjunction with the map data to predict the heat output from a
south-facing vertical panel. The program will run under Windows or
MS-DOS (apologies to others; but this is a Windows box).


Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 14:48:12 GMT, "Leon"
wrote:


"Morris Dovey" wrote in message

At the bottom of the page there's a link that can be used in
conjunction with the map data to predict the heat output from a
south-facing vertical panel. The program will run under Windows or
MS-DOS (apologies to others; but this is a Windows box).


Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

The Ice Man Cometh with a fan.


Mark
(sixoneeight) = 618

"Morris Dovey" wrote in news:45a39b84$0$508$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

For anyone thinking of adding a bit of solar heat to their shop, I've
put up a web page (link below) with monthly maps showing how much
solar energy is delivered to locations in the USA. The data represents
a 30-year average.

If you're not in the USA, you may be able to find that information at
www.nrel.gov

At the bottom of the page there's a link that can be used in
conjunction with the map data to predict the heat output from a
south-facing vertical panel. The program will run under Windows or
MS-DOS (apologies to others; but this is a Windows box).

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SolarEnergy.html




It's still early in the morning, but I'm having a bit of a challenge
processing this data.

The map seems to indicate that, for example, southern Arizona has more
heating potential in December than in August. And that the SF Bay area
seems pretty close to the same number all year.

Am I reading this correctly? Is this 'sun angle'?

Patriarch,
off to work...

I have the same interpretation problem.

I have two 4x8ft solar panels for heating domestic potable water. Installed
in mid 80's. I know the relative heat gain over the months.

The colours make sense for my location SE PA, but the legend does not make
sense.

According to the legend, my location has less heat gain in April/May than
March. Does not happen this way for me.

Dave Paine.

"Patriarch" wrote in message
. 136...
"Morris Dovey" wrote in news:45a39b84$0$508$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

For anyone thinking of adding a bit of solar heat to their shop, I've
put up a web page (link below) with monthly maps showing how much
solar energy is delivered to locations in the USA. The data represents
a 30-year average.

If you're not in the USA, you may be able to find that information at
www.nrel.gov

At the bottom of the page there's a link that can be used in
conjunction with the map data to predict the heat output from a
south-facing vertical panel. The program will run under Windows or
MS-DOS (apologies to others; but this is a Windows box).

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SolarEnergy.html




It's still early in the morning, but I'm having a bit of a challenge
processing this data.

The map seems to indicate that, for example, southern Arizona has more
heating potential in December than in August. And that the SF Bay area
seems pretty close to the same number all year.

Am I reading this correctly? Is this 'sun angle'?

Patriarch,
off to work...

Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...

You may also want to cool your house, too. How does a zero operating
cost strike you?

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

Patriarch wrote:

| The map seems to indicate that, for example, southern Arizona has
| more heating potential in December than in August. And that the SF
| Bay area seems pretty close to the same number all year.
|
| Am I reading this correctly? Is this 'sun angle'?

Yup. Note that this data is for _vertical_ panels. When the sun is
high overhead during the summer, it "sees" much less capture area. In
winter the sun is much lower and "sees" a much greater capture area.

Not accounted for in the map data is a significant increase in
reflected radiation during winter months - as much as a 95% increase
is possible from clean snow...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SolarEnergy.html

Tyke wrote:
| I have the same interpretation problem.
|
| I have two 4x8ft solar panels for heating domestic potable water.
| Installed in mid 80's. I know the relative heat gain over the
| months.
|
| The colours make sense for my location SE PA, but the legend does
| not make sense.
|
| According to the legend, my location has less heat gain in
| April/May than March. Does not happen this way for me.

I'd guess that your DHW panels aren't vertical (vertical is best for
winter heat only). Since we want hot water year-round, DHW panels are
more likely to be set at an angle that works most efficiently at
vernal and autumnal equinox angles.

How's my guess?

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

Good guess. I read "Vertical" but did not think about how this affected
performance. This makes sense now.

My latitude is 41.5 deg N. I installed the panels at about 45 deg to give
slightly better performance in winter. I can get TOO much gain in summer if
water use is low.

Dave Paine.

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...
Tyke wrote:
| I have the same interpretation problem.
|
| I have two 4x8ft solar panels for heating domestic potable water.
| Installed in mid 80's. I know the relative heat gain over the
| months.
|
| The colours make sense for my location SE PA, but the legend does
| not make sense.
|
| According to the legend, my location has less heat gain in
| April/May than March. Does not happen this way for me.

I'd guess that your DHW panels aren't vertical (vertical is best for
winter heat only). Since we want hot water year-round, DHW panels are
more likely to be set at an angle that works most efficiently at
vernal and autumnal equinox angles.

How's my guess?

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

Tyke wrote:

| Good guess. I read "Vertical" but did not think about how this
| affected performance. This makes sense now.

Most of us aren't used to thinking of seasons in geometric terms.
Since the earth's axis of rotation is tilted (approximately) 23.43929
degrees from its orbital plane, there's a difference of almost 47
degrees between summer and winter solstices. That's a big swing.

| My latitude is 41.5 deg N. I installed the panels at about 45 deg
| to give slightly better performance in winter. I can get TOO much
| gain in summer if water use is low.

Good plan. BTW, NREL also has the same kind of map data available for
panels tilted at increments from location latitude. I'd guess that
those will better reflect (no pun intended) the behaviors you've
experienced.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SolarEnergy.html

Morris Dovey wrote:
For anyone thinking of adding a bit of solar heat to their shop, I've
put up a web page (link below) with monthly maps showing how much
solar energy is delivered to locations in the USA. The data represents
a 30-year average.


snip

Im my area we've found out that solar powered devices require sunlight.

http://www.unpluggedliving.com/newsf...eeds-sunlight/

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

Patriarch wrote in
Am I reading this correctly? Is this 'sun angle'?

It's the Earth's tilt that determines seasons, yes.

The Earth is actually closest to the Sun in winter and furthest in summer,
but the northern hemisphere is tilted toward the Sun in summer and receives
more of those parallel rays and, hence, is warmer.

I have a problem with the maps, too, though. Because not only are solar
panels receiving more rays in summer, but the days are also longer. Sounds
like a good experiment for me to setup this winter.

Mike

Nova wrote:

| Im my area we've found out that solar powered devices require
| sunlight.

Yup. Solar or not, it would seem like a good idea to have some kind of
backup power arrangement.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

Mike wrote:
| Patriarch wrote in
|| Am I reading this correctly? Is this 'sun angle'?
|
| It's the Earth's tilt that determines seasons, yes.
|
| The Earth is actually closest to the Sun in winter and furthest in
| summer, but the northern hemisphere is tilted toward the Sun in
| summer and receives more of those parallel rays and, hence, is
| warmer.

I wasn't aware that our orbit is eccentric. During winter the
atmospheric filter is "deeper" and the sun is behind the horizon
longer so that the daily heating period is both weaker and shorter.

| I have a problem with the maps, too, though. Because not only are
| solar panels receiving more rays in summer, but the days are also
| longer.

The panels would receive more direct radiation in summer if they were
horizontal. A vertically-oriented panel actually receives less. Not
only that, the glazing on a vertical panel reflects more of the light
away during the summer (like a poorly silvered mirror).

| Sounds like a good experiment for me to setup this winter.

It could be interesting.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

Morris Dovey wrote:

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...


All I can say is .... Wow. Thanks for taking the time to put up the
site, the pics and the explanation. I know that was a lot of work and
I personally found it to be fascinating.

Good work!

Robert

"Morris Dovey" wrote in news:45a3b5de$0$502$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

Patriarch wrote:

| The map seems to indicate that, for example, southern Arizona has
| more heating potential in December than in August. And that the SF
| Bay area seems pretty close to the same number all year.
|
| Am I reading this correctly? Is this 'sun angle'?

Yup. Note that this data is for _vertical_ panels. When the sun is
high overhead during the summer, it "sees" much less capture area. In
winter the sun is much lower and "sees" a much greater capture area.

Not accounted for in the map data is a significant increase in
reflected radiation during winter months - as much as a 95% increase
is possible from clean snow...


There's _seldom_ clean snow where we are. Seldom _any_ snow. Heck, I
still have some very nice english roses that don't belive it's January
right now. Still blooming.

Solar here is an interesting challenge. I'll have to give it more thought
over the next week or so, as I'm traveling about. There's panels on the
roofs of several of the homes on my block, doing heat gain for their
swimming pools. Those folks are happy with them, so there's a start.

Patriarch

Very Cool


"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...
Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...

You may also want to cool your house, too. How does a zero operating
cost strike you?

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto

"Morris Dovey" wrote in news:45a41c5d$0$503$815e3792
@news.qwest.net:

I wasn't aware that our orbit is eccentric.

Kepler's first law of planetary motion: "Each planet revolves around the
Sun in an elliptical path, with the Sun occupying one of the foci of the
ellipse."

For Earth the eccentricity is tiny, though. Nothing like Pluto's. In
fact, I think all orbits have to be eccentric to some degree...only two
bodies of the same mass would wind up orbiting the same point equally.

Earth doesn't quite revolve around the Sun. They both revolve around a
common point, which resides somewhere _inside_ the Sun, but not at it's
center.

According to NASA (an article from 2001):"We make our closest approach to
the Sun (147.5 million km) in January, that's called perihelion, and we're
farthest from the Sun (152.6 million km) in July, that's aphelion."

I think it's all pretty cool.

Thanks for the update on the positioning of the solar panels.

Mike

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:22:45 -0600, "Morris Dovey" wrote:

Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...


Keep us apprised of when you get that perfected. My dad has always said
there should be a solar air conditioning capability similar to how the old
natural gas refrigerators used to work.



You may also want to cool your house, too. How does a zero operating
cost strike you?

ZOC is great as long as initial investment and amortized ownership costs
are below what a conventional system would cost. IMO, this is where solar
is having problems right now. Sure, I can get panels that would generate
enough electricity to run my house amd sell extra back to the grid during
times I'm not using it. However, the cost of ownership indicates it would
take at least 10 years to reach break-even and I'm not convinced that
materials technology is anywhere near having something like that last long
enough without repairs to ever pay back. That also assumes no little
issues like hailstorms or kids' balls wreaking havoc on the system.

It's been a couple of years since I investigated solar electric panels
(an obvious winner in a place like southern Arizona). I think I calculated
that electricity would have to reach 25 to 30 cents per KWH to even make
the panels close to competitive.


I realize what you are proposing is quite different, and I believe that
solar heating has a bit better payoff capability. Really do hope you can
perfect the solar A/C approach -- that would be way cool (no pun intended).



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Mark & Juanita wrote in
:

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:22:45 -0600, "Morris Dovey"
wrote:

Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...


Keep us apprised of when you get that perfected. My dad has always
said
there should be a solar air conditioning capability similar to how the
old natural gas refrigerators used to work.



You may also want to cool your house, too. How does a zero operating
cost strike you?

ZOC is great as long as initial investment and amortized ownership
costs
are below what a conventional system would cost. IMO, this is where
solar is having problems right now. Sure, I can get panels that would
generate enough electricity to run my house amd sell extra back to the
grid during times I'm not using it. However, the cost of ownership
indicates it would take at least 10 years to reach break-even and I'm
not convinced that materials technology is anywhere near having
something like that last long enough without repairs to ever pay back.
That also assumes no little issues like hailstorms or kids' balls
wreaking havoc on the system.

It's been a couple of years since I investigated solar electric
panels
(an obvious winner in a place like southern Arizona). I think I
calculated that electricity would have to reach 25 to 30 cents per KWH
to even make the panels close to competitive.


I realize what you are proposing is quite different, and I believe
that
solar heating has a bit better payoff capability. Really do hope you
can perfect the solar A/C approach -- that would be way cool (no pun
intended).


There are (as always, I guess) some very excited researchers, engineers
and manufacturers working in Silicon Valley on systems with much higher
reliability, manufacturability and simplicity, and much lower cost
structures than have been seen in recent years. I don't have my
checkbook out yet, but what seems feasible is a much lower local
production cost. One of the benefits to that is a much lower transport
infrastructure cost as well, at least for the locally produced power.

There is, I am certain, still a lot to learn in this area. And folks
are looking forward to it as well.

Patriarch

Mark & Juanita wrote:
| On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:22:45 -0600, "Morris Dovey"
| wrote:

|| You may also want to cool your house. How does a zero
|| operating cost strike you?
|
| ZOC is great as long as initial investment and amortized
| ownership costs are below what a conventional system would cost.

Yes - and here is where the fluidyne (a short name for a liquid piston
stirling cycle engine) absolutely shines for a limited set of
applications.

The engine itself is a plumbing construct, partly filled with water
and the remainder filled with a air. There are no special
requirements: neither the water nor the air need be particularly clean
and there is no pressurization.

This engine operates at temperatures below the boiling point of water
and without producing particularly high pressures. The only moving
parts are the air and water; and there aren't any "wear points".

The diameters and lengths of the plumbing elements are important; but
there doesn't appear to be any need to be fussy about precision.

If you knew the plumbing measurements, you could probably build your
second engine out of (mostly) schedule 40 PVC pipe in less than a half
hour. The engine could be expected to outlast your
(great-?)grandchildren if you protected it from UV and abuse.

If you powered it from a flat-panel solar collector, you'd probably
want to replace the polycarbonate glazing every quarter-century or so.
A 6mm x 48" x 96" sheet of twin-wall polycarbonate glazing cost me
about $40 last time I shopped for it.

I don't yet have exact numbers on what this thing is going to cost to
produce (I'll guess less than US$100/HP for engine and collector); and
I don't even have a clue as to what conventional systems cost to
produce, operate, or maintain - so I can't help much with your cost
analysis.

| IMO, this is where solar is having problems right now. Sure, I can
| get panels that would generate enough electricity to run my house

snip photovoltaic electricity cost lament

Agreed. Photovoltaics are over-priced and under-efficient; and, as
long as people are willing to pay too much for too little,
improvements will come slowly.

I don't have the resources to solve the photovoltaic production cost
problem (there is at least one that I'm aware of) so I don't waste my
time on it - but electricity doesn't necessarily provide the best
solution for /all/ problems.

If solar is having problems, it's because people insist on a "magic
bullet" - a single, comprehensive solution to all energy problems -
and solar is not a magic bullet (at least not yet).

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/SolarEnergy.html

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:22:45 -0600, "Morris Dovey"
wrote:

Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...


Keep us apprised of when you get that perfected. My dad has always said
there should be a solar air conditioning capability similar to how the old
natural gas refrigerators used to work.


Not solar but,

In Houston an industrial office complex near my home has a particular all
concrete building that uses water pipes that run under ground to cool the
building. The building is about 3000 sq ft and the owner had the system
installed after he bought the building. 10 years ago he told me that his
average cooling bill was about $30 per month.

"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:22:45 -0600, "Morris Dovey"
wrote:

Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...


Keep us apprised of when you get that perfected. My dad has always said
there should be a solar air conditioning capability similar to how the old
natural gas refrigerators used to work.



You may also want to cool your house, too. How does a zero operating
cost strike you?

ZOC is great as long as initial investment and amortized ownership costs
are below what a conventional system would cost. IMO, this is where solar
is having problems right now. Sure, I can get panels that would generate
enough electricity to run my house amd sell extra back to the grid during
times I'm not using it. However, the cost of ownership indicates it would
take at least 10 years to reach break-even and I'm not convinced that
materials technology is anywhere near having something like that last long
enough without repairs to ever pay back. That also assumes no little
issues like hailstorms or kids' balls wreaking havoc on the system.

It's been a couple of years since I investigated solar electric panels
(an obvious winner in a place like southern Arizona). I think I
calculated
that electricity would have to reach 25 to 30 cents per KWH to even make
the panels close to competitive.


I realize what you are proposing is quite different, and I believe that
solar heating has a bit better payoff capability. Really do hope you can
perfect the solar A/C approach -- that would be way cool (no pun
intended).

What you have stated is true unless you're off grid to begin with. My shop
and home in SW Colorado is on solar electric power. Solar equipment plus
install was a wash with bringing in a power line. I'm set with 240 volt
power, close to 1800 watts of panels, and enough battery to run things for a
few days (shop tools) or a week (house w/o shop) plus I have no monthly
bill. Only problem is that I'm not using it most of the time since I'm back
in Phx permanently. It would be nice to be selling that much power back to
the power company but the $25 grand needed to hook up power kind of messes
up that idea!

Gary

Here is a chea[ way to heat your shop....

http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?actio...=cr&lpage=none

on sale 1/2 price

GeeDubb wrote:


"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 09:22:45 -0600, "Morris Dovey"
wrote:

Leon wrote:

| Morris, do you have one for cooling the shop? ;~)

I'm so glad you asked! vbg

Take a look at http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/StirlingProject.html - one
of my leisure-time play group activities looks like it'll result in a
solar-powered air-conditioner...


Keep us apprised of when you get that perfected. My dad has always said
there should be a solar air conditioning capability similar to how the
old
natural gas refrigerators used to work.



You may also want to cool your house, too. How does a zero operating
cost strike you?


ZOC is great as long as initial investment and amortized ownership costs
are below what a conventional system would cost. IMO, this is where
solar
is having problems right now. Sure, I can get panels that would generate
enough electricity to run my house amd sell extra back to the grid during
times I'm not using it. However, the cost of ownership indicates it
would
take at least 10 years to reach break-even and I'm not convinced that
materials technology is anywhere near having something like that last
long
enough without repairs to ever pay back. That also assumes no little
issues like hailstorms or kids' balls wreaking havoc on the system.

It's been a couple of years since I investigated solar electric panels
(an obvious winner in a place like southern Arizona). I think I
calculated
that electricity would have to reach 25 to 30 cents per KWH to even make
the panels close to competitive.


I realize what you are proposing is quite different, and I believe that
solar heating has a bit better payoff capability. Really do hope you can
perfect the solar A/C approach -- that would be way cool (no pun
intended).

What you have stated is true unless you're off grid to begin with. My
shop and home in SW Colorado is on solar electric power. Solar
equipment plus install was a wash with bringing in a power line. I'm
set with 240 volt power, close to 1800 watts of panels, and enough
battery to run things for a few days (shop tools) or a week (house w/o
shop) plus I have no monthly bill. Only problem is that I'm not using
it most of the time since I'm back in Phx permanently. It would be nice
to be selling that much power back to the power company but the $25
grand needed to hook up power kind of messes up that idea!

Gary

Morris Dovey wrote:
| Mark & Juanita wrote:

|| IMO, this is where solar is having problems right now. Sure, I can
|| get panels that would generate enough electricity to run my house
|
| snip photovoltaic electricity cost lament
|
| Agreed. Photovoltaics are over-priced and under-efficient; and, as
| long as people are willing to pay too much for too little,
| improvements will come slowly.
|
| I don't have the resources to solve the photovoltaic production cost
| problem (there is at least one that I'm aware of)

Y'know, I hate when people claim to have the solution to one of my
problems but refuse to tell me what it is - but I realized that was
exactly what /I'd/ done here! Please accept my apologies.

A technical discussion of photovoltaic production is surely off-topic;
but in an effort to live by the golden rule, I've put up a web page
with a drawing showing a mechanism and a process for making very
inexpensive waferless solar cells. You can find it at the link below.

Now, what's really fun is that while I was putting the drawing
together, I had a flash of insight as to how these cells might be
incorporated into one of my air-heating panels in such a way that
_both_ sides of the cells could be used for power generation - I don't
think the power output would be doubled; but it might come close...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/Ribbon.html